Bob Cook made two large mistakes here. I wish he -- and others -- would
> The Iwaik pump, if running, would have added heat at about 29 watts per > the pump specification. > In my report, p. 24, I list the pump specifications. Mizuno measured the pump input power with the watt meter. It is 10.8 W, not 29 W. However, only a tiny fraction of this power is delivered to the water. Mizuno measured how much is delivered. It was only ~0.4 W. If you do not think so, explain why Fig. 19 is wrong. You can confirm that nearly all the electric power converts to heat at the pump motor. Touch a pump and you will feel the heat radiating. Many pumps have fans that blow the hot air out of the motor. With a good pump, the water is at the other end away from the motor, and very little heat transfers to it. > This was more than enough to raise the temperature without any reactor > heat source given the recorded decrease of 1.7 watts when nothing > was running or reacting. > Suppose this is true. Suppose it was 1.7 W and suppose that raises the temperature by 4 deg C. Pick any temperature rise you like: suppose it raises the temperature by 10 deg C, or 20 deg C. Here is the point, which I have made again and again: THE TEMPERATURE WAS ALREADY that much higher when the test began. The pump runs all the time. Using this method we measure from that starting baseline temperature up to the terminal temperature of the test. The pump heat -- *however much there is* -- is already included in the baseline. Therefore we never include it in excess heat. You need to answer these points if you want to have a serious discussion. - Jed
