1995.11.05 / John Logajan /  Re: A TB smear
     
Originally-From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: A TB smear
Date: 5 Nov 1995 23:24:20 GMT
Organization: SkyPoint Communications, Inc.

Bill Rowe (browe@netcom.com) wrote:
: I can with ordinary chemistry and recombination get 5W from 60mW.
: What I cannot do, is do this contiously for a long period of time.

The devil is in the details.

Given the appropriate details, I'm game for a little wager.

You get to run a thought experiment (i.e. formulas and known physical
constants will suffice in lieu of a lab experiment) in which you show
how you can get 5W for longer than a short time, and shorter than a
long time. :-)

So if we can pick an agreeable intermediate time, and given the known
components and geometry of the SOFE or ICCF5 PPC demos, show how 5W
can be delivered fitting known chemistry.

It certainly would be interesting to come up with a simple explanation
for this using known processes.  John White's idea was novel but depended
upon the existance of an unidentified "salt."  Therefore it was not
known chemistry -- known in the sense that it fit the components
available.

--
 - John Logajan -- jlogajan@skypoint.com  --  612-633-0345 -
 - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA -
 -   WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan    -

cudkeys:
cuddy5 cudenjlogajan cudfnJohn cudlnLogajan cudmo11 cudqt4 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.11.05 / Matthew Kennel /  Re: Incredibly stupid comments from Jones & Sullivan
     
Originally-From: mbk@I_should_put_my_domain_in_etc_NNTP_INEWS_DOMAIN (Matthew B. Kennel)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Incredibly stupid comments from Jones & Sullivan
Date: 5 Nov 1995 22:47:50 GMT
Organization: University of Tennessee, Knoxville

jedrothwell@delphi.com wrote:
:  
: As for converting the heat back into electricity, in a scaled up device that
: is a trivial engineering problem.

So, what's taking so long?  By scale up I of course mean scaled up
thermodynamically available heat, not sheer size.

:  
: - Jed
cudkeys:
cuddy5 cudenmbk cudfnMatthew cudlnKennel cudmo11 cudqt4 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.11.05 / Matthew Kennel /  Re: John N. White: GET A PUMP!!!
     
Originally-From: mbk@I_should_put_my_domain_in_etc_NNTP_INEWS_DOMAIN (Matthew B. Kennel)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: John N. White: GET A PUMP!!!
Date: 5 Nov 1995 22:51:14 GMT
Organization: University of Tennessee, Knoxville

VCockeram (vcockeram@aol.com) wrote:
: In article <browe-0311952224390001@10.0.2.15>, browe@netcom.com (Bill
: Rowe) writes:

: >
: >The point is, it is more than theorectically possible to heat water a few
: >degrees with a pump. This doesn't mean this is the explanation for the
: >SOFE demo

: Right!!!  At last!!!   Because all the readers of this forum should know
: by now 
: that the temperature in the cell inlet would have shown _any_ heat added
: to the 
: system by the pump.  I'm glad that ones finally been put to rest.

: lurking in las vegas                          Vince

There's another, perhaps odd thing to check:  is there any electric current
flowing in the water that in addition to that measured at the electroytic
plates?
cudkeys:
cuddy5 cudenmbk cudfnMatthew cudlnKennel cudmo11 cudqt4 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.11.03 / Travis Stone /  When Can we Expect to see A Scale-Up?
     
Originally-From: stone@cwis.unomaha.edu (Travis Stone)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: When Can we Expect to see A Scale-Up?
Date: 3 Nov 1995 18:07:08 GMT
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha (Faculty/Staff CWIS)



ASSUMING the SOFE-demo effect is real---and I realize that that's a big
assumption, but, hey, I try to keep an open mind, 'specially when
somebody says something's been experimentally observed---the question
that springs to *my* mind is:

When can we expect to see scaled-up experiments for producing
KILOWATT-level power?

I'm anxious to see how big such a rig would be---probably something like
a watering-tank for horses, I'll bet.

cudkeys:
cuddy3 cudenstone cudfnTravis cudlnStone cudmo11 cudqt4 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.11.06 / David Taylor /  Clarification
     
Originally-From: dct@vii.com (David C. Taylor)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Clarification
Date: 6 Nov 1995 01:26:51 GMT
Organization: Vyzynz

To clarify what I meant by comparing the integrated power, I should also say 
that with excess power of the reprted magnitude, it shouldn't matter that 
significant output power is not accounted for by gas loss.  If the output 
power is still greater than the input power over time even in an open cell, 
than a valid result has been achieved.  Otherwise, there's always some doubt 
(oops, looks like I just got kicked out of the TBs)

dct
cudkeys:
cuddy6 cudendct cudfnDavid cudlnTaylor cudmo11 cudqt4 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.11.05 /  VCockeram /  Re: Incredibly stupid comments from Jones & Sullivan
     
Originally-From: vcockeram@aol.com (VCockeram)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Incredibly stupid comments from Jones & Sullivan
Date: 5 Nov 1995 21:26:44 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)

In article <47jeum$4mp@gaia.ns.utk.edu>,
mbk@I_should_put_my_domain_in_etc_NNTP_INEWS_DOMAIN (Matthew B. Kennel)
writes:

>
>jedrothwell@delphi.com wrote:
>:  
>: As for converting the heat back into electricity, in a scaled up device
>that
>: is a trivial engineering problem.
>
>So, what's taking so long?  By scale up I of course mean scaled up
>thermodynamically available heat, not sheer size.
>
>:  
>: - Jed
>
 Ahh, we must have patience. This is new stuff and new stuff is hard to
 figure out. All new science takes a long time to bear fruit and I have
this 
 feeling the fruit of this is gonna be real sweet.

lurking in las vegas                          Vince 
cudkeys:
cuddy5 cudenvcockeram cudlnVCockeram cudmo11 cudqt4 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.11.05 /  VCockeram /  Re: John N. White: GET A PUMP!!!
     
Originally-From: vcockeram@aol.com (VCockeram)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: John N. White: GET A PUMP!!!
Date: 5 Nov 1995 21:26:55 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)

In article <47jf52$4mp@gaia.ns.utk.edu>,
mbk@I_should_put_my_domain_in_etc_NNTP_INEWS_DOMAIN (Matthew B. Kennel)
writes:

>
>There's another, perhaps odd thing to check:  is there any electric
current
>flowing in the water that in addition to that measured at the electroytic
>plates?
>
>

Agreed! But in looking at the setup I'm hard pressed as to where any
current could be flowing to.

lurking in las vegas                          Vince
cudkeys:
cuddy5 cudenvcockeram cudlnVCockeram cudmo11 cudqt4 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.11.05 /  VCockeram /  Re: A TB smear
     
Originally-From: vcockeram@aol.com (VCockeram)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: A TB smear
Date: 5 Nov 1995 21:27:05 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)

In article <47jh34$qdl@stratus.skypoint.net>, jlogajan@skypoint.com (John
Logajan) writes:

>You get to run a thought experiment (i.e. formulas and known physical
>constants will suffice in lieu of a lab experiment) in which you show
>how you can get 5W for longer than a short time, and shorter than a
>long time. :-)
>
>So if we can pick an agreeable intermediate time, and given the known
>components and geometry of the SOFE or ICCF5 PPC demos, show how 5W
>can be delivered fitting known chemistry.
>
>

 Hey John, I like that. My father (retired chemist) and I (computer
engineer) 
sat down one evening to do just that. All we could come up with 
is "damnifiknow. :)
 My dad and I did like the Mills-Farrell explaination though.

lurking in las vegas                          Vince
cudkeys:
cuddy5 cudenvcockeram cudlnVCockeram cudmo11 cudqt4 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.11.05 /  VCockeram /  Re: When Can we Expect to see A Scale-Up?
     
Originally-From: vcockeram@aol.com (VCockeram)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: When Can we Expect to see A Scale-Up?
Date: 5 Nov 1995 22:29:07 -0500
Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364)

In article <47dloc$7ea@s-cwis.unomaha.edu>, stone@cwis.unomaha.edu (Travis
Stone) writes:

>When can we expect to see scaled-up experiments for producing
>KILOWATT-level power?
>
>I'm anxious to see how big such a rig would be---probably something like
>a watering-tank for horses, I'll bet.
>
>
>
    --Assumption mode ON--
  Lets try: If 5ml volume (the size of the cell) produces 5 watts then 1
litre 
would would do it for a kilowatt.

lurking in las vegas                           Vince
cudkeys:
cuddy5 cudenvcockeram cudlnVCockeram cudmo11 cudqt4 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.11.05 / Bill Rowe /  Re: John N. White: GET A PUMP!!!
     
Originally-From: browe@netcom.com (Bill Rowe)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: John N. White: GET A PUMP!!!
Date: Sun, 05 Nov 1995 20:30:50 -0800
Organization: AltNet

In article <47jit0$gma@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, vcockeram@aol.com
(VCockeram) wrote:

>In article <browe-0511951208370001@10.0.2.15>, browe@netcom.com (Bill
>Rowe) writes:
>
>>Yes, any heat added to the electrolyte will be seen by the inlet
>>thermometer. However, this doesn't necessarily imply a change of reading
>>of the inlet thermometer. A reading change will depend on the amount of
>>heat, the resolution of the thermometer and the sensitivity of the
>>thermometer
>   
>  Wait a sec here, if I understand you, you are saying if I add heat to a > 
>  flowing liquid, pump it through a short length of tubing then measure it's
>  temperature as it flows past the thermometer, I'm not gonna see the heat!!

That is exactly right if the heat is added is small compared to the
resolution of the thermometer.
 
>  You have got to be kidding. Most lab grade thermometers are accurate to
>   one tenth of a degree and thermisters are accurate to at least one
>   hundredth of a degree.

But such a thermometer used and was it used properly so that it could
measure the temperature that accurately?

>>. These are also undoubtely a function of the electrolyte flow
>>rate, thermal mass and thermal capacity as well as the thermometer
>thermal
>>mass and thermal capacity. There are probably other variables I haven't
>>thought of.
>>
>>The point is no change in thermometer reading doesn't imply no heat is
>>added. It simply bounds the maximum heat that could have been added. It
>>may well be the amount of heat added is  insignificant.
>
>  Insignificant.  Now there's the word. Bill, it don't mean jack how much
>  heat the pump adds because the heat is caculated by subtracting the inlet
>  temperature from the outlet temperature. Cannot you see this? 

Would you still maintain that positition if the resolution of the
thermometer used was only to the nearest 10 deg C? I am certain such a
poor thermometer wasn't used. The point is how can you be so certain the
heat is insignificant when you don't know the resolution of the
thermometer or the physical process taking place? I wil agree your
assessment is probably correct. It is however not certain.

>>One of the things that is missing from the discussion is an estimate of
>>the uncertainty in the various numbers. The assumption is the uncertainty
>>is too small to be of significance. The problem is that it is an
>>assumption
>.
>   I will agree with you 100 percent on this, it should be posted and I'm
>   sure it will be. Look, Bill, with numbers like they are getting out of this
>   cell and with the known accuracy of thermometers I am positive that there
>   is some new process at work here.  

I agree with Harry Conover's posts, i.e., without some reasonable
estimates of the uncertainty there isn't any reason to be confident of a
new process.
-- 
"Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain"
cudkeys:
cuddy05 cudenbrowe cudfnBill cudlnRowe cudmo11 cudqt4 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.11.06 / Nick Rouse /  Re: John N. White: GET A PUMP!!!
     
Originally-From: nrouse@surface.fisons.co.uk (Nick Rouse)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: John N. White: GET A PUMP!!!
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 1995 08:57:33 UNDEFINED
Organization: Fisons

A point missed in the discussion of  the heating of a fish tank is
that, to the extent that it exists,  it is the cumulative result of many
recirculations of the water in the tank. What would be needed to 
explain the SOFE demo is a pump that could produce 5 degrees
of heating in a single pass. Or rather one that could add an 
equivalent amount of energy to the fluid in a way that did not
raise the temperature so that this energy could be released
later after it had passed the cell inlet thermometer and one in
which this effect was turned off in the calibration runs with no
electrical current to the cell
Nick Rouse

cudkeys:
cuddy6 cudennrouse cudfnNick cudlnRouse cudmo11 cudqt4 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.11.06 / John Logajan /  Re: Pumping Heat (Re: Proposed explaination of CETI effect)
     
Originally-From: jlogajan@skypoint.com (John Logajan)
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Pumping Heat (Re: Proposed explaination of CETI effect)
Date: 6 Nov 1995 07:47:59 GMT
Organization: SkyPoint Communications, Inc.

Harry H Conover (conover@max.tiac.net) wrote:
: Are we to conclude that the heat produced by the cell is itself
: incapable of adding enough temperture to "explore the performance of the
: cell at higher working temperatures?"

As an independent variable?  That's asking a bit of mother nature.

Cravens in-situ resistive heater calibration pulses, taken while the
cell was operating in the anomalous heat mode, showed heat in excess of
additive processes.  To further investigate this observation, a reservoir
heater was used to pre-heat the electrolyte to 40-60C.  Preliminary results
(at the time of the published report) showed a postive correlation between 
electrolyte pre-heating and the anomalous heat factor.

The only point I am trying to make here is that it is better to use an
independent variable to investigate such correlations than some dependent
variable, such as flow rate or electrolysis power variation.

--
 - John Logajan -- jlogajan@skypoint.com  --  612-633-0345 -
 - 4248 Hamline Ave; Arden Hills, Minnesota (MN) 55112 USA -
 -   WWW URL = http://www.skypoint.com/members/jlogajan    -
cudkeys:
cuddy6 cudenjlogajan cudfnJohn cudlnLogajan cudmo11 cudqt4 cudszM cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.11.06 / Hauke Reddmann /  Re: Pluton will spend more time now with www than with
     
Originally-From: fc3a501@AMRISC04.math.uni-hamburg.de (Hauke Reddmann)
Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.astro,alt.sci.physics.plutonium,sci.math,sci
chem,sci.bio.misc,sci.physics.electromag,sci.physics.fusion,sci.physics.
article
Subject: Re: Pluton will spend more time now with www than with
Date: 6 Nov 1995 10:02:54 GMT
Organization: University of Hamburg -- Germany

Who said something about logic?
When Arch announced that he would drop his postings I thought
"Good, no more multiple posts or off-topic prayers". But after
all, it's only less than 10% of all the posts I read anyway, and I got
a "next post" key if I don't want to read it,don't I? (...and kept
my mouth firmly shut!)
But when our "peers" are dancing around singing "The Wolf is dead!
The Wolf is dead!", I can understand Arch that he sings back,
"Am Not! Am Not!" 
I think _both_ sides act a little childish here.
-- 
Hauke Reddmann   fc3a501@math.uni-hamburg.de
<:-EX8
cudkeys:
cuddy6 cudenfc3a501 cudfnHauke cudlnReddmann cudmo11 cudqt4 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
1995.11.06 / Lawrence E /  Re: Paul Koloc still around
     
Originally-From: "Lawrence E. Wharton" <Wharton@climate.gsfc.nasa.gov>
Newsgroups: sci.physics.fusion
Subject: Re: Paul Koloc still around
Date: 6 Nov 1995 16:07:51 GMT
Organization: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center -- Greenbelt, Maryland USA

Paul Koloc is still around and he has been doing good work on hot 
fusion.  I have observed his experimental set up and was very impressed.  
A group from Los Alamos spent a week working with him on it and they 
were also impressed.  The first step in his fusion technique is to 
generate a stable plasma ball similiar to the Spheromak.  That work is 
going along well but he is not ready to present the results yet.

Lawrence E Wharton
wharton@climate.gsfc.nasa.gov
301 286-3486


cudkeys:
cuddy6 cudenWharton cudfnLawrence cudlnE cudmo11 cudqt4 cudszS cudyr1995 
------------------------------
processed by cud.pl ver. 0.5 Wed Nov  8 04:37:04 EST 1995
------------------------------
