1995.09.29 / Rich Hawryluk /  TFTR Update September 29, 1995
     
Originally-From: rhawryluk@pppl.gov (Rich Hawryluk)
Newsgroups: pppl.tftr.news,sci.physics.fusion
Subject: TFTR Update September 29, 1995
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 1995 16:25:09 -0400
Organization: Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory

Status (September 29, 1995):

Since the last update on September 16th further experiments and analysis of
the L-mode campaign in DT for ITER R&D needs has been carried out. In
addition an experiment was completed on alpha particle heating in D-T
plasmas and a campaign was started on the afterglow phase of Li-enhanced
D-T supershots and optimization of central Q.

The week of Sept. 11th was a scheduled DT run period for TFTR operations.
The machine ran extremely well and we completed the isotope scaling studies
in DT L-mode plasmas.  This work was in support of ITER R&D needs.

Status of ICRF L-Mode Experiments

Second harmonic tritium heating of ITER-relevant plasmas was investigated
the week of Sept 11th in the final series of discharges for DT-54.  No
tritium beam injection was used.  Tritium was delivered to the plasma via
gas puffing and wall recycling.  Spectroscopic measurements of the tritium
fraction at the plasma edge with a Fabry-Perot indicated that RF-only
plasmas consisted of 38 -54 % tritium.  In target plasmas which were
preheated by 7 MW of deuterium neutral beam injection, the core fraction of
tritium probably dropped to around 20%.  In both OH and  deuterium NB
target plasmas, clear evidence of substantial core tritium heating by fast
waves at the second harmonic resonance at 43 MHz was observed.

In RF-only plasmas, the maximum power coupled to the plasma was 2.9 MW  The
fast ion loss diagnostic detected a loss of energetic tritons which
correlated with the time behavior of the RF power. In particular, the loss
was observed to modulate in phase with RF power modulation pulses.  For the
first time, the energy distribution function of energetic tritons created
by second harmonic heating was measured with the alpha charge exchange
diagnostic.  The energetic triton energy increased from about 0.32 MeV with
1.5 MW of RF power to 0.5 MeV with 2.5 MW of RF power.  By varying the time
of lithium pellet injection, the triton tail energy was observed to
increase to its peak value within 300 msec of the start of the RF pulse.
The anisotropic energy content of these plasmas ranged up to about 120 kJ,
according to magnetics measurements of the total and diamagnetic stored
energies.

Deuterium neutral beam injection was used in some plasmas to create a
target plasma with densities and temperatures typical of those anticipated
in ITER startup regimes.  With 7 MW of deuterium NB injection and a maximum
RF power of 5 MW, the target density rose to between 5.5 - 6 e19 m-3. The
electron
temperatures were in the range of 4-6 keV.  Preliminary analysis of the
CHERS data indicates that the ion temperature increased with RF power, but
further analysis is needed to quantify the magnitude of the increase.  For
the last 1.0 second of the 1.7 second RF pulse, the RF power was modulated
at 10 Hz with an amplitude modulation factor of about 75%.  The total D-T
neutron rate modulated in phase with the RF power modulation, though the
magnitude of the neutron rate modulation was small, about 2%.   Direct
electron heating by the RF was also observed in the time response of the
electron temperature. Further analysis is in progress to determine the
relative power splits of the RF heating between the ions and the electrons.
 However, the coupling here was observed to be better than in D only
plasmas, when the only absorption mechanism is direct electron heating.
The results of the analysis of this D-T RF work will be discussed directly
with the ITER Joint Central team in the next few weeks.

Status of alpha-heating experiments

The week of Sept. 18th was a scheduled DT run period for TFTR operations.
The machine ran well and an experiment was completed on alpha particle
heating in D-T plasmas.  Also a campaign was started on the afterglow phase
of Li-enhanced D-T supershots.

An experiment to directly measure alpha particle heating in D-T plasmas by
comparing the electron temperature rise in similar D, T and D-T
neutral-beam-heated plasmas was performed on TFTR.  Approximately 30MW of
neutral beam heating was applied to 2.4MA, 5.6T plasmas with a major radius
of 2.52m.  There were eight  D-T plasmas with approximately 60% tritium
injection, two plasmas with 100% tritium beam heating and several deuterium
comparison plasmas.  An earlier study of the existing database of TFTR D-T
discharges had indicated that at least 6MW of fusion power was required in
order to clearly measure the alpha particle heating of electrons.  Although
operation free of carbon blooms was achieved in deuterium plasmas with up
to 34 MW of neutral beam heating, several of the D-T plasmas exhibited
significant carbon blooms with only 30MW of injected power.  The maximum
fusion power in the bloom-free D-T plasmas was only 5.6MW due to the
relatively poor plasma confinement time (160-170 ms) due to inadequate time
for re-conditioning the machine following the L-mode experiments.
Apparently deuterium recycling from the carbon limiter  was significant
since even the plasmas heated by only tritium beams had fusion powers of up
to 4.8 MW.  At present, detailed analysis is underway for this alpha
heating experiment, with the main emphasis on trying to separate alpha
particle heating from increases in the electron temperature resulting from
enhancement of the confinement time due to isotope effects.

An experiment was performed to study the so-called afterglow phase of
Li-enhanced D-T supershots.  The dramatic rise in the electron temperature
which characterizes this phase was seen reproducibly in about 10
discharges.  Modulated neutral beams at low power were injected into the
afterglow for diagnostic purposes.  The cause of the enhanced electron
temperature in these discharges is presently under investigation.  Several
of the D-T discharges obtained in the run performed extremely well.  In
particular, because of extensive conditioning with Li, Shot 89400 attained
QDT = 0.2 at only 10.4 MW input power.

These Li-enhanced D-T supershot experiments continued this week Sept. 25th
and were optimized at beyond original design machine parameters, i.e. with
6 Tesla operation. Late on Tuesday evening, which was the last run day of
this present campaign, a series of very good Li-enhanced D-T supershots
were obtained. Shot 89725 was a very high performance shot which had 23.5
MW of NB power and produced ~ 6.3 MW of fusion power. The neutron profile
was very peaked, which should give a high value for central Q ( ~ 0.6 -
0.8). Detailed analysis is under way at present with TRANSP transport code.


The following numbers for the performance of Shot 89725:

    Neo   = 8.7e19
    Tio   = 38 keV
    tauE  = 300 ms

    Zeff  = 2.00
    Nhdt  = 6.98e19

Tuesday September 26 th 1995 was the last run day of FY95 DT campaigns on
TFTR. Since the beginning of the DT campaigns in Nov 1993, TFTR has run
more than 600 tritium shots, and produced 4. x 10*20 DT neutrons which is
over 1.1GJ of fusion energy.  During this period of time >600 kCi of
tritium were processed safely.

In anticipation of reduced funding, we implemented  a voluntary separation
program, a voluntary reduction in force, and an involuntary reduction in
force which resulted in  a total staff reduction (voluntary and
involuntary) of about 269 which corresponds to about one third of the staff
at the Laboratory.  The exciting results from the D-T experiments over the
past two years were a result of the contributions of the entire Laboratory
and we will miss the men and women who are leaving.

Future Plans

We are analyzing a large backlog of data in preparation for the APS meeting
and performing maintenance on all of the subsystems while awaiting a
decision on FY'96 funding.

R. J. Hawryluk
609-243-3306
e-mail rhawryluk@pppl.gov


P.S.  If you do not wish to receive notices of TFTR status, please contact
me or send a message to postmaster@pppl.gov.  If you are aware of others
who wish to receive notices, please send a message to postmaster@pppl.gov
and do not send a message to tftr_news



_________________________________________________________________________
R. J. Hawryluk
rhawryluk@pppl.gov
PPPL - LOB 325
Phone:  (609) 243-3306
Fax:    (609) 243-3248


cudkeys:
cuddy29 cudenrhawryluk cudfnRich cudlnHawryluk cudmo9 cudqt3 cudszL cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.09.30 / Mitchell Jones /  Re: Is Griggs Experiment Hot Water Simplicity Incarnate?
     
Originally-From: 21cenlogic@i-link.net (Mitchell Jones)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Is Griggs Experiment Hot Water Simplicity Incarnate?
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 1995 04:40:13 -0500
Organization: 21st Century Logic

In article <browe-2909952115160001@10.0.2.15>, browe@netcom.com (Bill
Rowe) wrote:

> In article <21cenlogic-2709952031530001@austin-2-16.i-link.net>,
> 21cenlogic@i-link.net (Mitchell Jones) wrote:
> 
> >Now, down to business: the requirement that city water be drinkable is
> >what defeats your idea. Human beings are enormously sensitive to
> >impurities in water, and those sensitivities impact on the policies of the
> >providers of drinking water. Result: drinking water that seems "hard" to
> >human tastes generally contains mere trace levels of dissolved minerals.
> >Result: the specific heat of drinking water differs negligibly from that
> >of distilled water. But, of course, why should you believe me? Here is a
> >simple experiment that anyone can do: get two identical glasses. Fill them
> >to the same level, one with tap water, the other with distilled water, and
> >let them set until they are in thermal equilibrium with the surrounding
> >air. Then measure their temperature and record it. Next, place the two
> >glasses in your oven,  turn it on, and leave them long enough to kick the
> >temperature up to 150 F. or so. Then take them out, and measure their
> >temperatures. (Be careful to place the two glasses so that they are equal
> >distances from the heat source. If you use a microwave, place them on a
> >rotating turntable.) I just did this with my own household water (which
> >incidentally, is back country well water that is far too hard to be
> >drinkable), and I found that the temperatures were identical to within the
> >half degree or so accuracy of the instrument. I suggest that you try this
> >experiment where you live, and that others who read this also try it.
> >(Perhaps someone will read this who lives in Rome, Georgia, where Griggs
> >did his experiment, and we can lay this idea completely to rest!)
> 
> You make a very good point that the specific heat of drinking water is
> nearly the same as for distilled water. I realize the source of the water
> used in the Griggs device is drinking water. However, wasn't there reports
> of pitting of the rotor? Wouldn't you normally expect some corrosion/scale
> formation?
 
***{It is *very* likely that the pitting was due to cavitation rather than
to corrosion. (Cavitation voids frequently form next to metal surfaces
and, when they collapse, the massive overpressures that develop are
directed against the metal surface.) As for scale formation, the problem
there is that the solubility of minerals increases with temperature. Since
the output from the Griggs machine is hotter than the input, scale
formation is not likely to be a problem. (Scale formation is much worse in
the cooler sections of a piping system, for example.) On the other hand,
scaling sometimes results from precipitation due to ongoing chemical
reactions--e.g., from reactions with chlorine--and might be a problem if
the amounts of chlorine added are very large. (Such reactions tend to
speed up as the temperature rises.) --Mitchell Jones}***

I would think the operation of the Griggs device would change
> the quality of the water considerably from what is considered drinkable.
> Perhaps there is enough change to alter the specific gravity as Horace has
> suggested.

***{As noted above, mineral impurities in drinking water tend to be
present only in trace amounts. Thus even if all were removed--e.g., due to
ongoing reactions with chlorine--significant changes in specific gravity
are unlikely. On the other hand, it occurs to me that if the Griggs water
is massively chlorinated and contains lots of dissolved minerals (e.g.,
calcium carbonate), the fact that Griggs' machine heats the water could
produce a large jump in a reaction such as 2Cl2 + 2CaCO3 --> 2CaCl2 + 2CO2
+ O2 + heat. While the trace amounts of the minerals involved renders it
doubtful that this reaction could account for the observed excess heat, it
is a matter that needs to be quantified. Since I don't have time to do
that right now, I leave it as a problem for others. --Mitchell Jones}***

> -- 
> "Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain"

===========================================================
cudkeys:
cuddy30 cuden21cenlogic cudfnMitchell cudlnJones cudmo9 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.09.29 / Mitchell Jones /  Re: Testing the Mitchell Jones Hypothesis
     
Originally-From: 21cenlogic@i-link.net (Mitchell Jones)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Testing the Mitchell Jones Hypothesis
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 1995 16:38:50 -0500
Organization: 21st Century Logic

In article <hheffner-2909950642420001@204.57.193.73>,
hheffner@matsu.ak.net (Horace Heffner) wrote:

> In article <21cenlogic-2709950248160001@austin-1-13.i-link.net>,
> 21cenlogic@i-link.net (Mitchell Jones) wrote:
> 
> > In article <hheffner-2109950933120001@204.57.193.67>,
> > hheffner@matsu.ak.net (Horace Heffner) wrote:
> > 
> > <snip> 
> > > Speaking of harping, since you propose photons accelerate to light speed,
> > > how does your theory account for the finite mass (momentum) of the photon
> > > at light speed?  Perhaps this feature alone would account for breaking the
> > > first law of thermodynamics or conservation of mass.
> > 
> > ***{Horace, Einstein's mass transformation doesn't work for photons.
> > Period. You can't solve it to find the mass at lightspeed regardless of
> > whether you treat the rest mass of the photon as 0 or as some number
> > greater than 0. Either way, the denominator of the right side of the
> 
> This is *my* point exactly

***{That's a stretch. I took your point to be that I, by attributing mass
to photons, had some sort of problem with Einstein's mass transformation,
while you, by assuming that the photon had zero mass, escaped the problem.
Result: I pointed out that Einstein's mass transformation fails for you
also. And now, rather than admit that your argument failed, you are
claiming to have realized from the beginning that the "problem" applied as
much to your position as to mine! Wow! --Mitchell Jones}***

, and you are going to haver a similar problem
> with a Newtonian interpretation also

***{And here, barely half a sentence away from acknowledging that the
"problem" applies to your position as well as to mine, you are back
happily nattering on as if the "problem" is entirely mine after all!
--Mitchell Jones}***

, unless you assume a large finite
> rest mass for the photon. What law of acceleration and what force do you
> see involved here? Are you rejecting E=MC^2?

***{No. This relationship is a good, solid piece of mathematical physics
which works very well when interpolating between the types of data points
to which it has been curve fitted. Those data points consist of measured
masses and measured energy equivalencies, and the relationship  E=MC^2
accurately fits to the curve of those measured data points. In the case of
a photon of frequency f, however, two problems arise: (a) we have the
measured energy, but not the measured mass, and, thus, we have no data
point; and (b) the unknown mass lies outside the range of masses that we
have actually measured. This means that if we attempt to use  E=MC^2 to
calculate the associated mass, we are using a curve fitted mathematical
construct to extrapolate rather than to interpolate, and are on
notoriously shaky ground. This doesn't bother me, because I recognize that
I am dealing with curve fitted mathematics here, and I recognize the
limitations of curve fitted mathematics. You, on the other hand,
apparently do *not* recognize this as a mere piece of curve fitted
mathematics. You, apparently, think it captures some sort of deep
underlying truth about the world and, as a consequence, you expect it to
perform a task for which it is not suited. This, however, is *your*
"problem," not mine. --Mitchell Jones}***    
> 
> 
> > equation is zero, and the result is undefined. Frankly, this result
> > doesn't bother me, because curve fitted mathematics is notoriously flaky
> > when used to extrapolate rather than to interpolate. I am satisfied if it
> > predicts results that lie between the experimentally determined data
> > points, and I do not expect it to work for results that do not. 
> > --Mitchell Jones}***
> > > 
> > > Regards,
> > > 
> > > Horace
> > > -- 
> > > Horace Heffner 907-746-0820    <hheffner@matsu.ak.net>
> > > PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645
> > 
> > ===========================================================
> 
> Regards,                          <hheffner@matsu.ak.net>
>                                   PO Box 325 Palmer, AK 99645
> Horace Heffner                    907-746-0820

===========================================================
cudkeys:
cuddy29 cuden21cenlogic cudfnMitchell cudlnJones cudmo9 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.09.29 / Matthew Kennel /  Re: French nuclear test agenda
     
Originally-From: mbk@caffeine.engr.utk.edu (Matthew Kennel)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: French nuclear test agenda
Date: 29 Sep 1995 22:22:59 GMT
Organization: Oak Ridge National Laboratory and Univ. Tenn.

Bob Pendleton (bobp@bga.com) wrote:
: Martin Sevior (msevior@physics.unimelb.edu.au) wrote:

: : The world is no more fearful of France than it already was. France's actions
: : may well spell the end of its presence in the South Pacific. It is certainly
: : not a good time to be a French Tourist done here. Much like being a South 
: : African abroad during appartheid. France has not advanced its cause in the
: : world with these tests.

: Hmm, how to say this? I think the world is much more fearful of France
: now than it was before they restarted nuclear testing. I think the
: world is much less respectful of France now. France is doing a very
: good job of converting respect (what little it had) into fear.

: It's rather like finding out that your neighbors Doberman has rabies.

Perhaps, but until no more than a couple of years ago a number of countries
(namely USA and China) were testing, and there was little angst and
hand-wringing. 

There was just a slight bit of annoyance when China set off a 500 kt plus
charge recently.  AFAIK no U.S. tests in recent decades have been that
large. 

Though I do see the moral objections to testing in the pacific vs.
say Corsica. 

: 			Back to lurking

: 				Bob P.
cudkeys:
cuddy29 cudenmbk cudfnMatthew cudlnKennel cudmo9 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.09.29 /  jonesse@plasma /  Re: Kasagi paper
     
Originally-From: jonesse@plasma.byu.edu
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Kasagi paper
Date: 29 Sep 95 14:39:04 -0600
Organization: Brigham Young University

In article <44cj46$1pp@soenews.ucsd.edu>, 
barry@starfire.ucsd.edu (Barry Merriman) writes:
> Just to expand on my previous comment:
> 
> It seems that before looking for more exotic
> reactions, one needs to simulate the proton and alpha spectra
> that can result from the following reactions:
> 
> Give a population composed of the following energetic potential 
> reactants (species @ energy) (which are present in
> the beam, and as a result of nuclear fusions)
> 
> n @ 2.5  , 14 MeV
> p @ 14   , 3  MeV, 
> D @ 0.15      MeV, 
> 3He @ 1       MeV, 
> 4He @ 3.5, 3.6MeV
> 
> consider the collision of these (coulomb coll. in the
> case of charged particles) with
> 
> D @ 0, 0.15 MeV
> 3He @ 0, 1 MeV
> 
> to produce energized reactants for a 
> 
> D + 3He -> p (14 MeV + extra KE)  + 4He (3.6 MeV + extra KE)
> 
> so that the broad distribution of the ``extra KE'' random variable
> would match the observed high energy tail of p, 4He.

Kasagi et al. report that when they run for long enough periods of time
to build up sufficient 3He (via d+d --> 3He + n), they do indeed see the
proton peak at 14 MeV which Barry describes above -- but the peak is narrow
and does not match the observed high energy proton bump.  Moreover, in most
cases this 14 MeV peak is clearly absent, so the d+3He reaction is not
responsible for the anomalous p bump.

As for the alphas, Barry, look at Fig. 4 in the Kasagi paper I faxed to you.
The calculated spectral shapes for what they call 'the sequential
reaction' (namely, d+3He --> p + alpha) are entirely different from the
observed bumps in alphas at 135 and 155 degrees (which are anomalous).  
Indeed, the conventional  D(3He,alpha)p
reaction fails to give alphas with energy above 5 MeV, whereas alphas
having up to 6.5 MeV are reported.

> 
> Also, one could consider collisions between the first population above,
> and 
> 
> p @ 14   , 3  MeV, 
> 4He @ 3.5, 3.6MeV
> 
> to directly add KE to these products, which would could also contribute
> to the observed spectrum.

No, the 14 MeV protons are absent in short runs, as I mentioned above; 
everything else is absorbed in a 200 micron-thick Al degrader -- but the
anomalous high-energy protons make it through and are still seen (in
rates too small to be explained in terms of pile-up).

> 
> ----------
> 
> Aside from the possibility that the anomalous high energy tail 
> comes from collisons as described above, if we consider the proposed
> reaction in the paper, D + D + D -> p + n + a, what is the chance that
> an excited D + D state could last long enough to slam into
> another D nucleus? They do one attempt at estimating this in the
> paper (and its way too small by their calc, because they use
> the prob of two target D's being within a nuclear radius of eachother,
> then getting hit by a beam D).
> 
> Instead, what if one estimated it this way: The original beam 
> D (0.15MeV) hits a target D, and forms an excited nuclear state
> (D + D)*, which is moving at a velocity of ~ 10^6 m/sec. Thus, to
> travel the distance to an adjacent D, which is ~ 1 Ang = 10^-10 m, 
> it would take 10^-16 seconds. 
> 
> Now, the normal lifetime of (D + D)* would be ~ h/dE, where dE is
> the transition energy, which, being ~ 1MeV, gives a lifetime
> of about 10^-20 seconds. So, all we would need is a metastable state 
> that lasts an additional 10,000 x longer to make this feasible....
> possible?
> --
> Barry Merriman
> UCSD Fusion Energy Research Center
> UCLA Dept. of Math
> bmerriman@fusion.ucsd.edu (Internet; NeXTMail is welcome)

The excited states of 4He have been thoroughly studied:  there is no such
metastable state in existence.  I don't believe Kasagi et al's d+d+d explanation
for the anomalous high-energy proton and alpha bumps, incidentally... 
I think we need first to repeat the experiment and verify the reported
anomalous effects.

--Steven Jones
cudkeys:
cuddy29 cudenjonesse cudmo9 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.09.29 /  jonesse@plasma /  cancel <1995Sep29.142525.2414@plasma.byu.edu>
     
Originally-From: jonesse@plasma.byu.edu
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: cancel <1995Sep29.142525.2414@plasma.byu.edu>
Date: 29 Sep 95 14:39:20 -0600

cancel <1995Sep29.142525.2414@plasma.byu.edu>
cudkeys:
cuddy29 cudenjonesse cudmo9 cudqt3 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.09.29 / Barry Merriman /  Re: Testing the Mitchell Jones Hypothesis
     
Originally-From: barry@starfire.ucsd.edu (Barry Merriman)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Testing the Mitchell Jones Hypothesis
Date: 29 Sep 1995 21:19:18 GMT
Organization: UCSD SOE

> In <21cenlogic-2009951048240001@austin-1-4.i-link.net> 21cenlogic@i-link.net  
(Mitchell Jones) writes:
> 
> >However brief the velocity
> >rise time may be, the principle of continuity requires that the photon
> >pass through all the intervening states of motion. Period.

Uhh...would you mind telling us exactly what a
_photon_ is, and what you mean by its speed, to help us visualize its  
``acceleration''.
--
Barry Merriman
UCSD Fusion Energy Research Center
UCLA Dept. of Math
bmerriman@fusion.ucsd.edu (Internet; NeXTMail is welcome)


cudkeys:
cuddy29 cudenbarry cudfnBarry cudlnMerriman cudmo9 cudqt3 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.09.29 / Bill Rowe /  Re: Is Griggs Experiment Hot Water Simplicity Incarnate?
     
Originally-From: browe@netcom.com (Bill Rowe)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Is Griggs Experiment Hot Water Simplicity Incarnate?
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 1995 21:14:38 -0700
Organization: AltNet - $5/month uncensored news - http://www.alt.net

In article <21cenlogic-2709952031530001@austin-2-16.i-link.net>,
21cenlogic@i-link.net (Mitchell Jones) wrote:

>Now, down to business: the requirement that city water be drinkable is
>what defeats your idea. Human beings are enormously sensitive to
>impurities in water, and those sensitivities impact on the policies of the
>providers of drinking water. Result: drinking water that seems "hard" to
>human tastes generally contains mere trace levels of dissolved minerals.
>Result: the specific heat of drinking water differs negligibly from that
>of distilled water. But, of course, why should you believe me? Here is a
>simple experiment that anyone can do: get two identical glasses. Fill them
>to the same level, one with tap water, the other with distilled water, and
>let them set until they are in thermal equilibrium with the surrounding
>air. Then measure their temperature and record it. Next, place the two
>glasses in your oven,  turn it on, and leave them long enough to kick the
>temperature up to 150 F. or so. Then take them out, and measure their
>temperatures. (Be careful to place the two glasses so that they are equal
>distances from the heat source. If you use a microwave, place them on a
>rotating turntable.) I just did this with my own household water (which
>incidentally, is back country well water that is far too hard to be
>drinkable), and I found that the temperatures were identical to within the
>half degree or so accuracy of the instrument. I suggest that you try this
>experiment where you live, and that others who read this also try it.
>(Perhaps someone will read this who lives in Rome, Georgia, where Griggs
>did his experiment, and we can lay this idea completely to rest!)

You make a very good point that the specific heat of drinking water is
nearly the same as for distilled water. I realize the source of the water
used in the Griggs device is drinking water. However, wasn't there reports
of pitting of the rotor? Wouldn't you normally expect some corrosion/scale
formation? I would think the operation of the Griggs device would change
the quality of the water considerably from what is considered drinkable.
Perhaps there is enough change to alter the specific gravity as Horace has
suggested.
-- 
"Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain"
cudkeys:
cuddy29 cudenbrowe cudfnBill cudlnRowe cudmo9 cudqt3 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
processed by cud.pl ver. 0.5 Sun Oct  1 04:37:04 EDT 1995
------------------------------
