Electrical power was not recorded in most of rossi's tests. The only test with a power chart inside the report was in january. All other test they used amperometers and didnt provide any chart Il giorno 03/dic/2011 21.08, "Jed Rothwell" <jedrothw...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
> Mary Yugo <maryyu...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> > The total amount supplied during the warm up phase is easily measured. >> It is >> > the total amount of electricity supplied. >> >> Maybe it's easily measured but in fact it wasn't continuously recorded >> in most if not all of Rossi's tests. > > > It has been recorded and it is stable. > > > > >> > We know >> > how much heat a body of this size and surface temperature radiates. That >> > alone was much more than the total that went in. >> >> I don't think we have the necessary measurements to calculate heat >> loss by radiation. > > > All you need is the surface area and temperature. See: Stefan-Boltzmann > Law. Since you have some expertise in calorimetry I am surprised you did > not realize this. > > >> >> With the obvious insulation, I doubt it was >> anything like the total that went in. >> > > Insulation cannot prevent heat from coming out of the reactor. It can only > slow it down. Since the outer surface was nearly as hot as the inside, this > insulation hardly delayed it at all. You can see that it would cool down in > 40 min. > > > >> It is obvious that the thing would cool down to >> > room temperature in ~40 min. >> > >> >> I don't know about that. Again, Rossi refused the methods needed to >> confirm your assertion as he did any definitive testing. >> > > You do know about that. The decay curve is clearly shown in the graph, > several times. That was definitive. The method is simple: cut the power and > watch the temperature decline. > > > >> > We know the upper limit for the thermocouple error. It was 0.1 deg C by >> the >> > only serious analysis -- but even if it was more it would not be enough >> to >> > negate this conclusion. >> >> If by thermocouple error you include thermocouple placement, it could >> be a lot more than that. > > > No, it would not. See: > > > http://lenr-canr.org/RossiData/Houkes%20Oct%206%20Calculation%20of%20influence%20of%20Tin%20on%20Tout.xlsx > > Unless you can show a problem here, Houkes wins this debate. Anyway, as I > pointed out, two different methods were used to measure the heat output, > and they were in reasonable agreement, so there is no large problem with > the thermocouples. > > > >> But again, we could know and we don't >> because Rossi won't allow the proper testing method that would clearly >> tell us about all such potential errors (and more). >> > > His methods clearly tell us about all potential errors, by first principle > analysis. Granted, not with much precision. > > - Jed > >
