No. Admittedly the temperature drop at powerdown may or may not be valid. In fact if there's any magnetic field associated with the heating coils there could be some EMF from shutting it down. It would seem to be an anomaly if we assume it was measuring anything with thermal mass. Just notice that the next valid reading is at the level it was before power off. There does seem to be some inaccuracy (or at least variation) in the thermometry. For instance the anomalous drop in T1 to 21.4 at 21:10. Aside from a couple of obvious glitches there is nothing thyere that dosen't suggest the temperature decay expected from thermal inertia causes. In fact it is not possible to rule out thermal inertia at all as it must exist. It's as likely that the gravitational field suddenly ceased to exist as thermal inertia was eliminated. In any case even if this was a demo of anomalous heat the explanation certainly wouldn't be CF. There's no way to justify that. In my opinion more study needs to be done on the heating core. ----- Original Message ----- From: Roarty, Francis X To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 12:32 PM Subject: RE: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:E-cat news at Nyteknik
Any mass has a certain gradient described in temp/time for thermal gain or loss. I think Jed was specifying the period where the temperature rebounded higher than it existed while being heated by input power. That seems anomalous to me made more curious by the initial drop in temp when the input power is initially removed - the extra temp would seem to indicate the reaction has reinitiated without the resistive heating. My posit is that the active heating has opposite effects on the reaction cavities where the dominant heat is being generated by nominal nano scale cavities while there also exist some hot spots of sub nano geometry that are held from runaway by the pulse width modulation - I suspect that these pockets can finally start to run away when the PWM is removed and quickly grow to the point where they start to reignite the larger cavities in place of the PWM. This would also explain Rossi's concern about damage - not only to the pico cavities melting down and losing the ability to operate closed loop but also over stimulating the larger cavities to plastic hot conditions where the stiction forces would alleviate the Casimir geometries.[melting closed or growing perpendicular whiskers] Fran From: Joe Catania [mailto:zrosumg...@aol.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 11:11 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: EXTERNAL: Re: [Vo]:E-cat news at Nyteknik A) You're a fool to tell me that the E-Cat has no thermal inertia. It certainly does. This is unavoidable. B) The data given are certainly consistent withy thermal inertia being the cause. ----- Original Message ----- From: Jed Rothwell To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2011 10:46 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:E-cat news at Nyteknik Joe Catania <zrosumg...@aol.com> wrote: The E-Cat ran for 35 minutes without electrical power? Did anyone tell you that the thermal inertia will run the E-Cat for that long? At 22:35 input electric power was 2.5 kW. All electric power was cut off at this time. The temperature dropped from 131.9°C down to 123.0°C, which is the expected amount. At 22:40, 5 minutes later, the temperature rose to 133.7°C, higher than it was with electric power input. By 23:10 when the run ended, the temperature had fallen to 122.7°C. Stored heat cannot explain this behavior. That would violate the second law of thermodynamics. Since the flow rate remained stable, the temperature cannot rise without some source of energy production within the cell. - Jed
