It appears we have made no progress at all on the issues I have raised. Rather than wasting more time on that now, I would very much appreciate information on a side issue you have raised in the discussion.
At 2:58 PM 8/20/4, Edmund Storms wrote: >2. An isoperibolic calorimeter has an artifact when a magnetic field is >applied. >Such fields change the internal thermal gradients so that the calibration no >longer applies. Therefore, any claim based on such a calorimeter involving a >magnetic field can not be believed. Could you explain how a magnetic field significantly changes thermal gradients in an isoperibolic calorimeter? I assume you mean here that even if magnets in the calorimeter are replaced with masses of the same size, shape and thermal properties, but having no magnetic field, the change in calibration will still be seen? If it is known in advance that magnetic fields are going to be used in a calorimeter, it seems like it should be a fairly small issue to use materials in the calorimeter that do not significantly change their thermal properties in a magnetic field. It should of course be impossible for a static magnetic field to actually change the total energy balance of a process, as that would be a violation of conservation of energy. Thus the question arises: even if there is no motion of conductors, and even if no materials are used which have thermal properties which are altered significantly by magnetic fields, can the calibration constant of an isoperibolic calorimeter be altered by magnetic fields enclosed within the calorimeter? Regards, Horace Heffner
