Re: [Vo]:vortex mass
I think they have Eric, if you put a bunch of photons in a reflective box, the resistance to acceleration of the box is increased by the presence of the photons just consider the blue/red shifting of the energy of the reflecting photons. And I believe it is considered likely that photons also create a gravity field, indeed it seems it must. And so it is tricky to work out what definition of mass is there where photons don't have any? John On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 7:54 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: It would have been a surprise to find that nanovortices did not have mass since they obviously have energy. Mass is a tricky thing. Photons have no rest mass, for example, even though they can carry as much energy as you can put into them. But they do follow the contours of spacetime, almost as if they had mass. (I wonder, here, whether physicists have gotten themselves into another language game with this one.) Eric
Re: [Vo]:vortex mass
On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 7:54 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: It would have been a surprise to find that nanovortices did not have mass since they obviously have energy. Mass is a tricky thing. Photons have no rest mass, for example, even though they can carry as much energy as you can put into them. But they do follow the contours of spacetime, almost as if they had mass. (I wonder, here, whether physicists have gotten themselves into another language game with this one.) Eric
Re: [Vo]:vortex mass
Eric Photons are never at rest as far as I know. They do carry momentum and when they interact impart momentum to rest mass items. In addition neutrinos are thought to have some mass and they are never at rest as far as I know. Bob - Original Message - From: Eric Walker To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2015 8:42 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:vortex mass On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 7:54 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: It would have been a surprise to find that nanovortices did not have mass since they obviously have energy. Mass is a tricky thing. Photons have no rest mass, for example, even though they can carry as much energy as you can put into them. But they do follow the contours of spacetime, almost as if they had mass. (I wonder, here, whether physicists have gotten themselves into another language game with this one.) Eric
Re: [Vo]:vortex mass
- Original Message - From: Bob Cook To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2015 8:34 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:vortex mass Dave-- That a correct assessment IMHO. In addition the idea that the energy associated with the decay of a vortex escapes the system as a high energetic particle is not consistent with observations (that do not include radiation associated with such energetic particles or things). Unless the mass acts like a neutrino with very little interaction with matter--a neutral particle carrying a large angular momentum and high energy that does not react with much at all. I would point out that this idea does not seem to be the case either, since energy seems to be captured in the form of heat from many LENR reactions. I still bet that the vortex spin energy (angular momentum energy) is distributed in small quanta and hence to heat of the surrounding material. The effective mass of the energetic vortex decreases as its spin energy is distributed to the surrounding electronic environment. The rate of the reaction is associated with the decay rate of the vortex. I would say that good instrumentation could pick up this decay rate and its amplitude by the monitoring the creation of local IR radiation. Bob - Original Message - From: David Roberson To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2015 7:54 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:vortex mass It just demonstrates that there is a lot to learn about physics. LENR is certainly going to open a lot of doors as it becomes better understood. It would have been a surprise to find that nanovortices did not have mass since they obviously have energy. Now someone could make a point that once they fade away they no longer possess energy, but that just implies that the original energy is dispersed somewhere when that occurs. Why did they not realize this in the first place? E=MC^2 has been known for a long time now. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Feb 3, 2015 9:53 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:vortex mass https://carnegiescience.edu/news/cosmic_accounting_reveals_missing_light_crisis The extreme ultraviolet light source crisis could indicate LENR is the cause of both Dark Matter and Dark Energy. LENR could be blowing the universe apart with the production of all this XUV over the last few billion years. When the universe was younger, there was little dust present, less LENR, and less dark energy. Science will not find the mechanism for dark matter and dark energy until science understands LENR. On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 2:18 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: see the following for tha anapole theory of dark matter http://news.vanderbilt.edu/2013/06/dark-matter/ See the following for the Bec theory of dark matter http://scitechdaily.com/reinterpretation-cold-dark-matter-bose-einstein-condensate On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 9:24 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: http://phys.org/news/2015-02-nanovortices.html Nanovortices have mass. This has profound implications for the characterization of cosmic LENR. There is evidence that space is filled with excited hydrogen and helium. These vast areas between galaxies form dusty plasma that produce extreme ultraviolet light and soft x-rays to the tune of 400% above any possible celestial body source. The dark matter inside galaxies behave as if this strange stuff was coherent and exist in a huge galaxy wide BEC. I had conjectured that Cosmic LENR had mass and it was in fact the source of the mass attributed to dark matter. Well here is the experiment that shows that nano vortices which includes LENR associated vertices have mass.
[Vo]:After Physics, deep notions about physics, new book, David Z. Albert: KurzweilAI dot net: Rich Murray 2015.02.03
After Physics, deep notions about physics, new book, David Z. Albert: KurzweilAI dot net: Rich Murray 2015.02.03 After Physics, deep notions about physics, new book, David Z. Albert: KurzweilAI dot net: Rich Murray 2015.02.03 http://rmforall.blogspot.com/2015/02/after-physics-deep-notions-about.html http://www.kurzweilai.net/after-physics After PhysicsFebruary 2, 2015 Author: David Z AlbertPublisher: Harvard University Press (1/5/2015) *[+] http://www.kurzweilai.net/images/0674731263.01.S001.LXXX.jpgAfter Physics* presents ambitious new essays about some of the deepest questions at the foundations of physics, by the physicist and philosopher David Albert. The book’s title alludes to the close connections between physics and metaphysics, much in evidence throughout these essays. It also alludes to the work of imagining what it would be like for the project of physical science—considered as an investigation into the fundamental laws of nature—to be complete. Albert argues that the difference between the past and the future—traditionally regarded as a matter for metaphysical or conceptual or linguistic or phenomenological analysis—can be understood as a mechanical phenomenon of nature. In another essay he contends that all versions of quantum mechanics that are compatible with the special theory of relativity make it impossible, even in principle, to present the entirety of what can be said about the world as a narrative sequence of “befores” and “afters.” Any sensible and realistic way of solving the quantum-mechanical measurement problem, Albert claims in yet another essay, is ultimately going to force us to think of particles and fields, and even the very space of the standard scientific conception of the world, as approximate and emergent. *Kindle edition also available at this link http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00RLHMNNM/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8camp=1789creative=390957creativeASIN=B00RLHMNNMlinkCode=as2tag=kurznet-20linkId=YHHGW2LTS2W6WBNN.* As a matter of course, every soul citizen of Earth has a priority to quickly find and positively share evidence for healthy and safe food, drink, environment, and society. within the fellowship of service, Rich Murray, MA Boston University Graduate School 1967 psychology, BS MIT 1964 history and physics, 1039 Emory Street, Imperial Beach, CA 91932 rmfor...@gmail.com 505-819-7388 cell 619-623-3468 home http://rmforall.blogspot.com https://www.facebook.com/rmforall rich.murray11 free Skype audio, video chat
Re: [Vo]:vortex mass
Photons may not have rest mass, but they do carry momentum and energy. These parameters are at a magnitude determined by E=MC^2. Dave -Original Message- From: Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Feb 3, 2015 11:42 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:vortex mass On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 7:54 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: It would have been a surprise to find that nanovortices did not have mass since they obviously have energy. Mass is a tricky thing. Photons have no rest mass, for example, even though they can carry as much energy as you can put into them. But they do follow the contours of spacetime, almost as if they had mass. (I wonder, here, whether physicists have gotten themselves into another language game with this one.) Eric
Re: [Vo]:vortex mass
There is something that keeps this from happening Eric. As you speed up from your frame of reference toward what you perceive as the frame of rest of the photon you will never catch up to it. It will always appear to be moving at the speed of light relative to you. As you move faster in the direction the photon is traveling, it becomes red shifted more and more. This appears to occur forever as you speed up. The conclusion is that the photon can not have a frame of reference that is at zero velocity. I suppose you could think of the frame of reference of the photon as being when it becomes a static magnetic or electric field. In that case it is no longer a photon. Dave -Original Message- From: Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Feb 4, 2015 2:05 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:vortex mass On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 9:43 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: Photons are never at rest as far as I know. One question I have -- is there anything keeping them from being considered at rest within their own frame of reference? Eric
Re: [Vo]:vortex mass
I see evidence that what we refer to as electromagnetic fields actually have mass distributed throughout their spatial distribution. This is due in part to the calculations of the energy located within a field. If you recall fields studies during your college years one of the parameters that is studied is the energy stored within a static capacitve or inductive field. Most of the energy is outside of the actual device. Another reason that I believe that these fields have mass is how they interact with nearby moving particles. To explain what I mean by this statement, consider what happens to a high speed electron entering a magnetic field. Under most conditions it becomes immediately deflected by it interaction with that field. To deflect the electron, a force had to be applied and momentum has to be exchanged. This interaction can take place at a point in space that is far removed from the current flow that generates the field. Since the speed of light is finite, information does not reach the source current before the electron begins to be deflected. If you consider the case of a deep space magnetic field which has an atom located within it that undergoes beta- decay, it is obvious that the path of that emitted electron is curved long before the moving currents that set up the field have any idea that it has happened. You can calculate the change in momentum that the electron undergoes fairly easily for a spatially simple field distribution. So, you might ask how does the total momentum balance? The only way a balance can occur, as far as I understand the problem, is for the mass associated with the local region of the large field to undergo an acceleration. If this actually happens then the distribution of the energy and momentum of the large field must change. This changing field would likely set up a moving wave in space that we detect as a photon interaction. If you want to follow up on this concept further, consider the implications of the electric field emanating from an electron. Since the electric field surrounding the electron spreads forever into space, its mass should have a component that is spread in a like manner. The magnitude of this energy spread out component might possibly make up the entire mass of the particle. I have not performed this calculation, but it would be interesting to see how much might be distributed instead of highly localized as a point particle. Perhaps someone has the knowledge and time to make that calculation. Is it possible that a proton, which has the same far field behavior as an electron is a tighter physical structure of the same type of electric field with mass? In that case, as you move closer to the center of the particle, the field increases as one divided by distance squared. That would suggest that the mass associated with the field increases rapidly as you come closer to its origin. If you sum up all the mass associated with the much smaller field region, how small would the particle become when it effectively contains the mass that we measure? This exercise is intended to open possible avenues of discussion and does not reflect the current physics understanding of quantum mechanics. I personally cling to quantum mechanics and respect how well it defines what is seen under real life situations. Of course, Mills has offered his theories that overturn that understanding. My thoughts are just an exercise in what if type of speculation. Dave -Original Message- From: David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wed, Feb 4, 2015 1:04 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:vortex mass Photons may not have rest mass, but they do carry momentum and energy. These parameters are at a magnitude determined by E=MC^2. Dave -Original Message- From: Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Feb 3, 2015 11:42 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:vortex mass On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 7:54 AM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: It would have been a surprise to find that nanovortices did not have mass since they obviously have energy. Mass is a tricky thing. Photons have no rest mass, for example, even though they can carry as much energy as you can put into them. But they do follow the contours of spacetime, almost as if they had mass. (I wonder, here, whether physicists have gotten themselves into another language game with this one.) Eric
Re: [Vo]:vortex mass
On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 9:43 PM, Bob Cook frobertc...@hotmail.com wrote: Photons are never at rest as far as I know. One question I have -- is there anything keeping them from being considered at rest within their own frame of reference? Eric
Re: [Vo]:vortex mass
https://carnegiescience.edu/news/cosmic_accounting_reveals_missing_light_crisis The extreme ultraviolet light source crisis could indicate LENR is the cause of both Dark Matter and Dark Energy. LENR could be blowing the universe apart with the production of all this XUV over the last few billion years. When the universe was younger, there was little dust present, less LENR, and less dark energy. Science will not find the mechanism for dark matter and dark energy until science understands LENR. On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 2:18 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: see the following for tha anapole theory of dark matter http://news.vanderbilt.edu/2013/06/dark-matter/ See the following for the Bec theory of dark matter http://scitechdaily.com/reinterpretation-cold-dark-matter-bose-einstein-condensate On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 9:24 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: http://phys.org/news/2015-02-nanovortices.html Nanovortices have mass. This has profound implications for the characterization of cosmic LENR. There is evidence that space is filled with excited hydrogen and helium. These vast areas between galaxies form dusty plasma that produce extreme ultraviolet light and soft x-rays to the tune of 400% above any possible celestial body source. The dark matter inside galaxies behave as if this strange stuff was coherent and exist in a huge galaxy wide BEC. I had conjectured that Cosmic LENR had mass and it was in fact the source of the mass attributed to dark matter. Well here is the experiment that shows that nano vortices which includes LENR associated vertices have mass.
Re: [Vo]:MFMP testing schedule
Umm . . . they spelled calibration wrong. It is unprofessional. Lugano Thermal Verification - Caibration
Re: [Vo]:vortex mass
It just demonstrates that there is a lot to learn about physics. LENR is certainly going to open a lot of doors as it becomes better understood. It would have been a surprise to find that nanovortices did not have mass since they obviously have energy. Now someone could make a point that once they fade away they no longer possess energy, but that just implies that the original energy is dispersed somewhere when that occurs. Why did they not realize this in the first place? E=MC^2 has been known for a long time now. Dave -Original Message- From: Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Feb 3, 2015 9:53 am Subject: Re: [Vo]:vortex mass https://carnegiescience.edu/news/cosmic_accounting_reveals_missing_light_crisis The extreme ultraviolet light source crisis could indicate LENR is the cause of both Dark Matter and Dark Energy. LENR could be blowing the universe apart with the production of all this XUV over the last few billion years. When the universe was younger, there was little dust present, less LENR, and less dark energy. Science will not find the mechanism for dark matter and dark energy until science understands LENR. On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 2:18 AM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: see the following for tha anapole theory of dark matter http://news.vanderbilt.edu/2013/06/dark-matter/ See the following for the Bec theory of dark matter http://scitechdaily.com/reinterpretation-cold-dark-matter-bose-einstein-condensate On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 9:24 PM, Axil Axil janap...@gmail.com wrote: http://phys.org/news/2015-02-nanovortices.html Nanovortices have mass. This has profound implications for the characterization of cosmic LENR. There is evidence that space is filled with excited hydrogen and helium. These vast areas between galaxies form dusty plasma that produce extreme ultraviolet light and soft x-rays to the tune of 400% above any possible celestial body source. The dark matter inside galaxies behave as if this strange stuff was coherent and exist in a huge galaxy wide BEC. I had conjectured that Cosmic LENR had mass and it was in fact the source of the mass attributed to dark matter. Well here is the experiment that shows that nano vortices which includes LENR associated vertices have mass.
[Vo]:MFMP testing schedule
MFMP have laid out their schedule for testing the Rossi style high temperature E-Cat. *DogBone Week, Live Now* http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/home/mfmp-blog/446-dogbone-week-live-now Adrian Ashfield
[Vo]:an idea re Hot Cat replication
Dear Friends, The race of Hot Cat replication will be more and more diversified . This: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2015/02/how-i-have-replicated-hot-cat-once.html is my personal contribution, in the very spirit of the old Hungarian proverb: Only a fool dances better than he can! During the next days please cross all your crossable parts for the MFMP team!!! Peter -- Dr. Peter Gluck Cluj, Romania http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com
Re: [Vo]:MFMP testing schedule
I am following their comments as best I can. If they are using a waveform cutting circuit such as with SCR's then the fundamental current will be shifted in time as compared to one that is not cut up. I would measure the RMS voltage at 60 hertz, and read the fundamental 60 hertz current. Then multiply these by the COS of the phase angle between them. It does not work to use the RMS values of these waveforms (including all harmonics) to obtain the product. Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Feb 3, 2015 2:55 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:MFMP testing schedule There was a voltage multiplier set in the setup of the PCE that has been corrected. In-line measurements are being used to verify the setup of the PCE. I don't think they should be using the SCR controller - I would rather they use the variac. The load should be pretty much flat-on resistive for all of the harmonics. They are currently measuring a PF=1. The concerns with the SCR controller are asymmetric +/- switching and noise that could be introduced into the thermocouple channels. Painful to watch sometimes, yes; but they are working through it. I have a chat line open to them. On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 12:35 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: The guys performing the test are being tricked by the phase shift between the current and the supply voltage. A triac controller will cause that to happen. Can someone contact them directly and let them know that this may be the hangup. It is painful to watch them chasing this problem. I can not get in touch with them directly. Thanks. Dave -Original Message- From: a.ashfield a.ashfi...@verizon.net To: Vortex-l Vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Feb 3, 2015 11:55 am Subject: [Vo]:MFMP testing schedule MFMP have laid out their schedule for testing the Rossi style high temperature E-Cat. DogBone Week, Live Now http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/home/mfmp-blog/446-dogbone-week-live-now Adrian Ashfield
Re: [Vo]:MFMP testing schedule
There was a voltage multiplier set in the setup of the PCE that has been corrected. In-line measurements are being used to verify the setup of the PCE. I don't think they should be using the SCR controller - I would rather they use the variac. The load should be pretty much flat-on resistive for all of the harmonics. They are currently measuring a PF=1. The concerns with the SCR controller are asymmetric +/- switching and noise that could be introduced into the thermocouple channels. Painful to watch sometimes, yes; but they are working through it. I have a chat line open to them. On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 12:35 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: The guys performing the test are being tricked by the phase shift between the current and the supply voltage. A triac controller will cause that to happen. Can someone contact them directly and let them know that this may be the hangup. It is painful to watch them chasing this problem. I can not get in touch with them directly. Thanks. Dave -Original Message- From: a.ashfield a.ashfi...@verizon.net To: Vortex-l Vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Feb 3, 2015 11:55 am Subject: [Vo]:MFMP testing schedule MFMP have laid out their schedule for testing the Rossi style high temperature E-Cat. *DogBone Week, Live Now* http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/home/mfmp-blog/446-dogbone-week-live-now Adrian Ashfield
Re: [Vo]:MFMP testing schedule
The PCE830 will take this into account for all of the harmonics automatically once it is setup properly. It should be a nearly perfectly resistive load until over 100kHz, which makes it only a small problem with using the inline meters. Once they have the PCE setup properly, then they are in good shape. They have the option to put the SCR controller into zero-crossing mode (which they should do if they use it). However, now they are now switching to using the variac as the source. Then it gets much simpler. On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 1:00 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I am following their comments as best I can. If they are using a waveform cutting circuit such as with SCR's then the fundamental current will be shifted in time as compared to one that is not cut up. I would measure the RMS voltage at 60 hertz, and read the fundamental 60 hertz current. Then multiply these by the COS of the phase angle between them. It does not work to use the RMS values of these waveforms (including all harmonics) to obtain the product. Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Feb 3, 2015 2:55 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:MFMP testing schedule There was a voltage multiplier set in the setup of the PCE that has been corrected. In-line measurements are being used to verify the setup of the PCE. I don't think they should be using the SCR controller - I would rather they use the variac. The load should be pretty much flat-on resistive for all of the harmonics. They are currently measuring a PF=1. The concerns with the SCR controller are asymmetric +/- switching and noise that could be introduced into the thermocouple channels. Painful to watch sometimes, yes; but they are working through it. I have a chat line open to them. On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 12:35 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: The guys performing the test are being tricked by the phase shift between the current and the supply voltage. A triac controller will cause that to happen. Can someone contact them directly and let them know that this may be the hangup. It is painful to watch them chasing this problem. I can not get in touch with them directly. Thanks. Dave -Original Message- From: a.ashfield a.ashfi...@verizon.net To: Vortex-l Vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Feb 3, 2015 11:55 am Subject: [Vo]:MFMP testing schedule MFMP have laid out their schedule for testing the Rossi style high temperature E-Cat. *DogBone Week, Live Now* http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/home/mfmp-blog/446-dogbone-week-live-now Adrian Ashfield
Re: [Vo]:MFMP testing schedule
The guys performing the test are being tricked by the phase shift between the current and the supply voltage. A triac controller will cause that to happen. Can someone contact them directly and let them know that this may be the hangup. It is painful to watch them chasing this problem. I can not get in touch with them directly. Thanks. Dave -Original Message- From: a.ashfield a.ashfi...@verizon.net To: Vortex-l Vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Feb 3, 2015 11:55 am Subject: [Vo]:MFMP testing schedule MFMP have laid out their schedule for testing the Rossi style high temperature E-Cat. DogBone Week, Live Now http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/home/mfmp-blog/446-dogbone-week-live-now Adrian Ashfield
Re: [Vo]:MFMP testing schedule
They should celebrate their spell checker. On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 5:29 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Umm . . . they spelled calibration wrong. It is unprofessional. Lugano Thermal Verification - Caibration
Re: [Vo]:MFMP testing schedule
The variac is the best way to be sure of the results. Another alternative would be to measure the RMS current and square that and multiply by the load resisance. Even a chopped waveform will give accurate results with that method. The PCE830 is designed to take that into consideration unless it is of little value. Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Feb 3, 2015 3:06 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:MFMP testing schedule The PCE830 will take this into account for all of the harmonics automatically once it is setup properly. It should be a nearly perfectly resistive load until over 100kHz, which makes it only a small problem with using the inline meters. Once they have the PCE setup properly, then they are in good shape. They have the option to put the SCR controller into zero-crossing mode (which they should do if they use it). However, now they are now switching to using the variac as the source. Then it gets much simpler. On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 1:00 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: I am following their comments as best I can. If they are using a waveform cutting circuit such as with SCR's then the fundamental current will be shifted in time as compared to one that is not cut up. I would measure the RMS voltage at 60 hertz, and read the fundamental 60 hertz current. Then multiply these by the COS of the phase angle between them. It does not work to use the RMS values of these waveforms (including all harmonics) to obtain the product. Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Feb 3, 2015 2:55 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:MFMP testing schedule There was a voltage multiplier set in the setup of the PCE that has been corrected. In-line measurements are being used to verify the setup of the PCE. I don't think they should be using the SCR controller - I would rather they use the variac. The load should be pretty much flat-on resistive for all of the harmonics. They are currently measuring a PF=1. The concerns with the SCR controller are asymmetric +/- switching and noise that could be introduced into the thermocouple channels. Painful to watch sometimes, yes; but they are working through it. I have a chat line open to them. On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 12:35 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: The guys performing the test are being tricked by the phase shift between the current and the supply voltage. A triac controller will cause that to happen. Can someone contact them directly and let them know that this may be the hangup. It is painful to watch them chasing this problem. I can not get in touch with them directly. Thanks. Dave -Original Message- From: a.ashfield a.ashfi...@verizon.net To: Vortex-l Vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Feb 3, 2015 11:55 am Subject: [Vo]:MFMP testing schedule MFMP have laid out their schedule for testing the Rossi style high temperature E-Cat. DogBone Week, Live Now http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/home/mfmp-blog/446-dogbone-week-live-now Adrian Ashfield
Re: [Vo]:MFMP testing schedule
If only it could be that simple ... the wire resistance is changing as a function of temperature. For the Kanthal A1 wire, it is not changing too much though. But it is still a good and easy sanity check measurement. Bob On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 1:16 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: The variac is the best way to be sure of the results. Another alternative would be to measure the RMS current and square that and multiply by the load resisance. Even a chopped waveform will give accurate results with that method. The PCE830 is designed to take that into consideration unless it is of little value. Dave
Re: [Vo]:MFMP testing schedule
Good point Bob. I always like to have sanity checks to back up main, important measurements. Dave -Original Message- From: Bob Higgins rj.bob.higg...@gmail.com To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Tue, Feb 3, 2015 4:09 pm Subject: Re: [Vo]:MFMP testing schedule If only it could be that simple ... the wire resistance is changing as a function of temperature. For the Kanthal A1 wire, it is not changing too much though. But it is still a good and easy sanity check measurement. Bob On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 1:16 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote: The variac is the best way to be sure of the results. Another alternative would be to measure the RMS current and square that and multiply by the load resisance. Even a chopped waveform will give accurate results with that method. The PCE830 is designed to take that into consideration unless it is of little value. Dave
