David Roberson <dlrober...@aol.com> wrote:
> Perhaps McKubre is chasing that last .01 degrees where great care is > required and everything is suspect. If this is the case, he might very > well see variations due to second order effects. > Oh, there were bigger problems than that, readily observable. The perturbations in the graph I sent were probably caused by ambient temperature changes. Back in the lab in Italy they use a constant temperature enclosure, I think (an incubator). But in the exhibition hall the noise was easily seen. I do not know what it translated to in degrees Celsius but when converted to Watts it was large. More than 1 W. This is a crude method. It could easily be improved, for example, by adding several TCs to the surface, to look for temperature variations. They had an IR sensor but it did not work well. A calorimeter such the one Miles used would be an improvement. If the self-sustaining test does not work, Celani and others intend to improve the calorimetry soon. I guess they will improve it anyway, even if it does work, but anyway, the self-sustaining test is the first priority. - Jed
