So to continue this line of arithmetic, we have a factor of 10 gain to
explain. First of all let's get rid of the Stefan Boltzmann amplification
of error by taking the fourth root of 10:
10^(1/4)
= 1.7782794
That means if we're looking for error as the source of the gain, we have to
plausibly
Erratum: luminosity should read photon flux
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 11:16 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
So to continue this line of arithmetic, we have a factor of 10 gain to
explain. First of all let's get rid of the Stefan Boltzmann amplification
of error by taking the
On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 9:16 AM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
So if we're looking for errors in power measurement, we need to be most
concerned about frequencies below the IR. The problem for those of us who
want to find error in the measure is that the peak is in the camera's
I wrote:
I believe Lubos Motl proposed somewhere that the E-Cat HT surface is not
well-approximated by a blackbody and that the true emissivity is likely to
be T^(4+d), where 0 d 1; i.e., that in the worst case scenario there
will be ~T^5 relationship between temperature and power rather
Here's what Motl says about it:
The emissivity is set to one i.e. they assume the reactor to be a black
body. This choice is labeled conservative. Except that the truth seems to
be going exactly in the opposite direction. The actual emissivity is lower
than one and it's the coefficient
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Andrew andrew...@att.net wrote:
**
Since the experimenters walked up to the experiment *after* it had been
turned on, we don't know for sure whether the existing cabling was used to
impart the RF, or a separate kickstart cable.
There were three runs. The
I found the major error:
The peak wavelength is in the infrared -- as it is with the sun -- and I
intuitively thought that the fact that much of the surface was bright red
thru yellow meant my picking dull red (700nm) was conservative. This
then fed via Wien's law proportionately into the fourth
Electrical INPUT is a two-edged sword. It can be measured to 6
decimal places .. IF you do it correctly,
but if you don't cover ALL bases you might miss something.
(eg an AC-only meter might not notice DC, or HF AC beyond its spec).
I've come to the conclusion that the only way to overcome
Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote:
I've come to the conclusion that the only way to overcome the power-side
fake is to put a power conditioner between Rossi's power plug (maybe
miswired per Bryce etc, or with a DC component) and his control box.
That would do it. But the fact is, any $20 watt
-Original Message-
From: Alan Fletcher [mailto:a...@well.com]
Sent: mercredi 22 mai 2013 22:19
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Levi Hot Cat paper is a gem : power conditioner needed
Electrical INPUT is a two-edged sword. It can be measured to 6
decimal places .. IF you
with the Swedes from someone who
understands the issues.
Andrew
- Original Message -
From: Jed Rothwell
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 1:27 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Levi Hot Cat paper is a gem : power conditioner needed
Alan Fletcher a...@well.com wrote
Andrew andrew...@att.net wrote:
There's a whole lot of detail about the input side that would benefit from
the light of day. What's required is an interview with the Swedes from
someone who understands the issues.
And who understands Swedish. Any volunteers?
- Jed
Talar ni Svenska. Not much, anyway.
- Original Message -
From: Jed Rothwell
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 1:46 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Levi Hot Cat paper is a gem : power conditioner needed
Andrew andrew...@att.net wrote:
There's a whole lot
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 3:33 PM, Andrew andrew...@att.net wrote:
**
I doubt that Rossi would allow a power conditioner, because he himself
states that there is some initial RF powering going on to kickstart the
device.
You misunderstand:
The power conditioner would be placed between the
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote:
...
I suggest you should stop fantasizing about this. Rossi did not take apart
the wall and install secret equipment that he turned on and then turned off
during the calibration. He did not find a way to send so much
James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
There is value in pursuing reductio ad absurda when they engage one of the
strongest arguments that the demonstration is valid:
That the power input could not conceivably have produced the radiation
wavelengths observed.
You have mentioned that
I wrote:
That the power input could not conceivably have produced the radiation
wavelengths observed.
You have mentioned that several times. Can you please post a more detailed
discussion of that, with equations and examples?
I realize you challenged Mary Yugo and other skeptics to do this
Did anyone scope the the power in for 50Hz? Or allow the researchers to
choose any outlet? I imagine anything on the same heater circuit would fry
if someone tried to insert an extra 500 watts. A light bulb added to the
circuit would have detected additional power... or any decent UPS will
include
Realistic speaking, to get a respectable scientists or engineers doing
formal peer review for a magazine is an impossible task right now. So, this
is a catch 22 problem to begin with.
2013/5/22 Brad Lowe ecatbuil...@gmail.com
Besides a circuit diagram showing all of the inputs, outputs, and
q=eps*s*(Th^4-Tc^4)*A
q=eps*(2*pi*r^2+2*l*pi*r)*s*(Th^4-Tc^4) ; subst(2*pi*r^2+2*l*pi*r, A)
q=5.6703*10^-8*eps*(2*pi*r^2+2*l*pi*r)*(Th^4-Tc^4) ; subst(5.6703e-8, s)
q=5.6703*10^-8*eps*(0.11*l*pi+0.00605*pi)*(Th^4-Tc^4) ; subst(.055, r)
q=2.40137205*10^-9*eps*pi*(Th^4-Tc^4) ; subst(.33, l)
Erratum: Strike the So, what...
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 5:53 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
q=eps*s*(Th^4-Tc^4)*A
q=eps*(2*pi*r^2+2*l*pi*r)*s*(Th^4-Tc^4) ; subst(2*pi*r^2+2*l*pi*r, A)
q=5.6703*10^-8*eps*(2*pi*r^2+2*l*pi*r)*(Th^4-Tc^4) ; subst(5.6703e-8, s)
Erratum: I also left out the substitution step for room temperature:
360=2.40137205*10^-9*pi*(Th^4-6975757441) ; subst(289)
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 5:53 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
Erratum: Strike the So, what...
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 5:53 PM, James Bowery
peak emission wavelength (λmax) = 5.9920696955297E-6 meter
or 6 micrometers
That is about the diameter of the Rossi micro-powder, could there be a
dipole blackbody resonant condition at work here? Of course there is!
On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 6:59 PM, James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com wrote:
One final erratum (hopefully): In the November run when the device
overheated to visible wavelengths, the input power was 1kW (p2), not 360W.
Therefore:
360=2.40137205*10^-9*pi*(Th^4-6975757441)
1000=2.40137205*10^-9*pi*(Th^4-6975757441) ; subst(1000, 360)
I can't resist:
What power level is required to get that device to barely enter the visible
wavelengths (700nm), again, assuming no losses other than black body?
again using http://www.ajdesigner.com/phpwien/wien_equation_t.php at 700nm:
blackbody temperature (T) = 4139.6692857143 kelvin
25 matches
Mail list logo
