<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>QuantumHeat.org</title>
		<description>Discuss QuantumHeat.org</description>
		<link>http://www.quantumheat.org</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 May 2026 16:12:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/de/component/jcomments/feed/com_content/229" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>ZacharyAlarl says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-27410</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Подскажите где найти лучшие рецепты со всего мира: от классических блюд, которые согревают душу, до современных кулинарных шедевров, которые впечатляют даже самых взыскательных гурманов - https://hexagon.vn/2023/06/22/harnessing-the-power-of-social-media-for-business-growth - вкусные домашние рецепты.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>ZacharyAlarl</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 28 Apr 2025 01:21:10 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-27410</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Danielgop says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-25969</link>
			<description><![CDATA[MEGA обеспечивает безопасность, защита и высокую скорость работы. У нас ссылка мега вы найдете своеобразный маркетплейс, где можно купить любые позиции всего за несколько секунд. Важно тщательно изучить предложения и выбрать самое привилегированн ое для вас. Обратите внимание на отзывы пользователей, они помогут вам найти надежных продавцов. https://xn--m14-psa.com]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Danielgop</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2025 17:38:15 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-25969</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>SamuelTucky says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-25492</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Кракен зеркало сайта: Всегда под рукой | кракен маркет зеркало кракен ссылка зеркало - https://vdetskommire.info/zdorove-f7/alergiya-u-beremennih-t0001 Анонимность — это важнейший аспект при общении через Телекрам наркотики . Для того чтобы избежать утечек личной информации, важно использовать специальные инструменты и настройки конфиденциально сти. Также стоит помнить о необходимости регулярного обновления программного обеспечения и использования дополнительных средств защиты, таких как ВПН и шифрование. Узнайте, как правильно настроить свою анонимность на платформе, на сайте про мессенджер наркотики . Хотя платформы, такие как КРАКЕН, могут предложить Купить героин, важно помнить, что это может быть связано с некоторыми рисками. Помимо юридических аспектов, покупатель может столкнуться с неопределенност ью относительно качества продукта, так как в некоторых случаях вещества могут содержать примеси или не соответствовать заявленным характеристикам . Важно тщательно подходить к любому решению и учитывать возможные последствия, чтобы обеспечить свою безопасность и здоровье. кракен купить порошок маркет - https://semasterz.net КРАКЕН площадка Телекрам]]></description>
			<dc:creator>SamuelTucky</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2025 22:10:25 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-25492</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Rickyrix says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-23010</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Ever dreamed of solving mysteries on the foggy streets of Victorian London? It’s not just another online slot — it’s a full-on detective journey through one of the most stylish eras in history. Every detail — from the reels to the background music — contributes to an unforgettable slot game experience. Play now and explore this story-driven slot game: https://www.wtcbarcelona.com/es/14-melhores-casinos-online-em-portugal-5/ Solve the mystery, spin the reels, and unlock big rewards in this standout casino slot.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Rickyrix</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2025 04:34:13 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-23010</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2709</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@AlanG Nice work.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2013 22:10:33 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2709</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>charlie tapp says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2704</link>
			<description><![CDATA[the noise on the eu cells might be radio signals, i have been studying fox hole radios from wwll they would use blue razor blades and pencil lead to build the diode with a coil of wire and pick up radio transmisions from the enemy. mabee the carbon sticky and the tc connection or mica along with the celani wire acting as the coil is picking up am stations. get an old piezoelectric ear piece and put in line with tc wire and listen for the oldies station.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>charlie tapp</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2013 16:35:44 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2704</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Malachi Heder says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2702</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@ Johan Eriksson There is a difference in the contact to the outer glass temp between the US and the EU cells. Here in the US we are using the copper bands (all are the same dimensions) and the tip of the TC is in the same spot, but mirrored, on each of the cells. In Europe, Mathieu is using carbon sticky dots to keep the TC adhered to the outside glass. We are using the same glass and other mechanical parts. The outer temp sensors are the only difference between the cells. We are going to use the outside or exterior TC 1. This is the TC in the middle of the cell, horizontally. As far as the difference goes, we are working with Mathieu to find why his exterior TCs are noisy. More updates will follow on that situation.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Malachi Heder</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2013 16:12:28 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2702</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2701</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Malachi Heder I see that you pulled the plug on the 2 1.0 cells (macor and mica). Are they just sitting at room temp now with the less than 1atm of H2? I'm still very curious about the H2 leak. Is it possible to design a passive experiment with one of the cells that's not be used? Pump it up with H2 and put it into a tank of water and watch for bubbles? It works for inner tubes :) We've spent many hours over the last 5 months watching the data from these two cells. What is it that we learned from this?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2013 14:57:24 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2701</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Johan Eriksson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2699</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Looking at the data from both the EU and US cells the mica temp is almost spot on equal: CellA CellB -US (138 138) -EU (198 199) But the external glass temps are different, even though you have ruled out any ambient differences(for the US cell atleast). -US ( 86 79) -EU (103 110 ) Tamb is 27 for EU and 31/31 for US These temps are at times 04-18 17:00 for both EU&US How come there is a difference in temperatures? Is there different types/thickness of the glass that contributes to different IR absorbtion? Or is the copper band that holds the sensors of different size? Btw, are you planning to use the mica temp or the external temp for measuring output power? Even though you are going to compare each cell to itself it would be good for the validity of this experiment to identify the reason for this difference.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Johan Eriksson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2013 07:41:21 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2699</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Malachi Heder says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2697</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@ Alan G Yes it does have active control. Pictures will be released soon on the temperature control box around the cells. We have noticed this problem. The box uses a space heater and its' built in fan. Air may not be flowing fast enough to take the heat created by the cell out as exhaust, more updates to come as we know.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Malachi Heder</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 18 Apr 2013 15:29:16 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2697</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Malachi Heder says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2695</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@ Robert E It was actually a fun little project, the ambient around each cell can be controlled to above 25 C, without warming the whole room up. This will be handy in summer when the room will be up above 25 C. We also have a motion sensor in the lab, it shows the times of the day when we are walking around in there. It will go from 0 to 0.08 when there is motion. This should be up in each test for the US cells soon, we can then correlate movement to different artifacts in the data.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Malachi Heder</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 14:15:24 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2695</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Ellefson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2694</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Wonderful news! Now I can put my club away. :-) Sorry for all the ruckus! I hope the horse is ok...]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Ellefson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2013 23:27:54 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2694</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2693</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@charlie tapp This might help http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/follow/follow-2/152-can-it-be-chemical]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2013 22:05:44 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2693</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2692</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Robert Ellefson Your concerns have been headed. In the US they have been fashioning a shield for the cells and will reveal this in an up and coming blog entry. In general we note when people have been close to the cells and logbook those events so that the times can be ignored.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2013 22:00:16 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2692</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Ellefson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2691</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I want to emphasize that my comments about the significance of environmental radiation coupling are intended to address *variations* in radiative flux that can be reduced by further isolation. We do not need to incorporate complex multi-variate models for the glass cylinder's radiative behavior into our predictive temperature models, provided we calibrate the net flux in a radiative environment consistent with that used during experiments. I know that the open, visible nature of these cells are one of the strong points of appeal, and I understand that cumbersome, opaque radiant shielding detracts from that appeal. I believe we can be clever in the design of the isolation barriers to maintain decent observer visibility, and can hinge open the shielding for reactor access. BTW, for 25mm wire-only cylinder, 200mm long (33% open, 300mm), recalculated flux delta for: 35C person: 0.3W 65C equipment rack: 1W 2 people: 0.6W 1 person, 1 rack: 1.3W]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Ellefson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2013 19:15:22 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2691</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>charlie tapp says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2690</link>
			<description><![CDATA[do you guys have any kind of number that you may be useing to calculate out the amount of power it takes to make the volume of hydrogen in the running cell before calling it exess]]></description>
			<dc:creator>charlie tapp</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2013 16:06:15 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2690</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Ellefson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2689</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Blarg, I'm finding the comment size limitations here are making it difficult to fully express my thoughts without condensing every sentence into an excessively-hig h-syllable-dens ity word salad. I wish to conclude my previous comment post by adding that while the smaller surface area of the actual wire will reduce the incoming radiated flux received by my current model, it will only be by a linear proportion. The glass has significant mass, transmissivity and emissivity, and while it will certainly participate in determining the net system heat flux, I believe it will not present a significant radiant isolation barrier, such as becoming the effective "cavity" ambient walls (which must be opaque, btw). I believe my models already reveal about as much useful information as we're likely to extract from this exercise: the effect of likely variations in environmental radiant coupling to our cells is not negligible within our experiment's measurement domain.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Ellefson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2013 15:48:46 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2689</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Ellefson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2688</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Yes! The coupling of environmental radiators onto the cell is what effects the net flux variance. The actual cell wire temperature does not have an effect (using these first-order models), only the temperature of the external body (but to the fourth power! ) and the area of the apparatus exposed to the radiation from that body. I believe the radiated power difference between the vacuum vs air environment will be negligable. The glass cylinder creates a complex model. I don't know what the spectral absorption curves look like for that material, but I can say that the combination of reflectance, transmission, refraction, absorption and emission will all be strongly dependent on angle-of-incide nce and wavelength. We'd likely need more empirical data than exists to model it accurately.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Ellefson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2013 15:24:50 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2688</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2686</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Robert Ellefson Thanks for this contribution Robert, it just goes to show how important it is to look at every aspect. If we can show 4+ watts on 15ish then we should be good. We will be publishing the wire temperature estimation basis soon. First there is temperature for current applied in free air conditions. Then there is estimated temperature of the wire in the vacuum cell. This is calculated on a Stefan–Boltzman n basis, with the initial cell temp being room temp. Over time the cell wall temp will effectively become the wire's environment temperature due to back radiation and because of IR thermalisation in the glass, will be significantly higher over time. We predict that the wire temperature at 20W will be in the many hundreds of degrees centigrade and the cell wall temperature will be more than 100 degrees above ambient after an extended run which will raise the wire temperature further. Given that the ultimate cell temperature may be 140+ degrees and there will be a vacuum between the hot wall of the cell and the extremely hot wire - and the wire is, in effect the ultimate target of the IR emitting from a 35 degree body, the incident IR on the exposed surface area of the wire may be minimal. When we have published this work, we would really appreciate you re-running your calculations.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2013 10:50:16 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2686</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>AlanG says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2683</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The Euro 1.3 cells are now running calibrations. Cell A is showing a lot of noise in the T_Out channels, up to 4 C short-term excursions using the "History" view. Cell B is much more stable, with less than 0.5 C excursions. Any ideas why the difference? Further note - 6 hours later with the heaters off, the noise seems to have settled down, though the spread of T1_Out1 and T1_Out2 is 0.5 C while T2-Out1 and T2_Out2 are practically identical.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>AlanG</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 15 Apr 2013 16:50:01 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2683</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Ellefson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2681</link>
			<description><![CDATA[In reviewing the literature describing radiated power, I may have found one source for the disconnect between what I'm describing for the radiative flux variances to be expected for different cells in a room and your interpretation of it as a crosstalk phenomena. The typical citation for Stefan-Boltzman n relies on a derivation of Planck's Law which assumes an idealized black-body radiator in a cavity with rigid, opaque walls of a uniform temperature and at thermodynamic equilibrium. This results in the classic form of the equation: P=esATo**4 where e=emissivity, s=Stefan's constant, A=surface area, To**4=absolute temperature of the object, to the fourth power. In engineering school, I learned a non-ideal form, with a system not in equilibrium, as: P=esA(To**4 - Ta**4) Where Ta is the (uniform) ambient wall temperature. See this wikipedia entry for more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_radiation#Radiative_heat_transfer]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Ellefson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 14 Apr 2013 03:28:49 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2681</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>artefact says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2680</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The LENRCAM as a great tool may be helpful in many other LENR experiments of others. Do you guys intent to open source it, sell it or is nothing of that possible due to copy right?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>artefact</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 13 Apr 2013 21:25:46 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2680</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Ellefson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2679</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Note: the *total* sum of areas of the various surfaces in the overall environment visible to each cell will determine the radiative potential for each cell. We're not just concerned with direct radiation crosstalk between cells, but rather variations in the entire radiative potential of cells that are positioned in slightly different portions of the room, because of the variations in what is visible to each cell. For example, if one cell is exposed to 30% more visible surface area of an exterior window than a different cell, that will drive a proportional variation in the relative thermal flux experienced by those two cells.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Ellefson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 13 Apr 2013 18:20:34 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2679</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2678</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Ecco, It seems there's a bit more to the story. On the afternoon of Feb 5th the pressure in the Mica V1.0 cell was the same as is is today (about 0.94) and the Pxs was about 5W. The Pxs today is almost 20W. That data tends to show something unique is happening that would seem to be more than its position in the lab. . 2013-02-05 21:15:00, 22.85,277.13,28 1.61,182.62,0.9 4,1.53,35.17,54 .04,22.89,1.85, 27.61,51.15,14. 90,105.20,254.2 8,109.95,4.79 2013-04-13 14:04:53 23.20,298.87,29 9.30,180.01,0.9 4,1.51,35.01,53 .13,23.06,1.85, 28.25,52.36,15. 24,105.50,275.6 6,125.28,19.78]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 13 Apr 2013 16:22:18 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2678</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2675</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ecco The MFMP was on the distribution list for the Celani warning email. We have been discussing it with him from pretty much the moment we received it. We have requested before and after photos, data from around the event, more detail on the experiment etc. to enable us to do a full blog post on the subject. He was very keen to help us put a quality blog post together on the matter and said he would send us images. Celani was always very keen about safety and precaution in these experiments - right from the moment he first endorsed the MFMP aims on camera... http://youtu.be/gHpYuUykWw0 We have had an unpublished mini-project ready about encouraging someone with Legal expertise to write up an experimenters legal waiver doc which is now more important than ever given this exciting development and the fact that we are no considering shipping pledge rewards of reactors and powder reactors as part of the revised kickstarter plan so that more people can become active members of the research. @Robert Ellefson The US cells are at an angle and separated so that the radiation normals are not incident on each of the cells. In the EU set up they are end to end and largely in a controlled free air volume so the chances for thermal cross talk are minimised, having said that, your suggestions are good thanks.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 13 Apr 2013 00:31:02 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2675</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>artefact says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2673</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Test Test Cell 1.0: P_Xs (W) 18.14 With V2 it will be really interesting.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>artefact</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 12 Apr 2013 22:17:02 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2673</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Ellefson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2672</link>
			<description><![CDATA[In addition to the foil, a light absorbing material like this product would be a good covering for the panels that you construct the isolation barriers from: http://www.edmundoptics.com/lab-production/general-tools/light-absorbing-black-out-material/1502 BTW, you don't actually need to use a rigid foam as thermal insulation, I was just suggesting that material as a convenient, lightweight source of the mylar foil's function. Any other material, covered with mylar and something similar to this light absorbing material, would perform similarly for this radiant transfer isolation function.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Ellefson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 12 Apr 2013 20:19:14 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2672</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Ellefson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2671</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Since the LENR-cam optimal IR setup has been determined to require directly blocking all visible light from the apparatus, it would serve a dual purpose to construct radiant isolation barriers. I would use 1" thick rigid foil-covered polyisocyanurat e foam (that or EPS), commonly available at home-supply stores for building insulation, to make boxes to enclose each apparatus separately. You can construct simple baffles to route cables, cameras and airflow, but block visible light entry and any radiant coupling of the device to the surrounding environment.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Ellefson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 12 Apr 2013 19:53:07 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2671</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Ellefson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2670</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ This will address convective transfer variations between cells but will not alter the radiant transfer differences between cells. Radiant heat transfer is proportional to the black-body emissive thermal delta between two visible surfaces, and the proportionate sum of radiatively-cou pled areas for the object in total. If you have a low-mass reflective barrier like mylar as an isolation barrier, or else a controlled/iso- thermal opaque surface surrounding the cells, then you will control that source of variation. I haven't done any math to quantify how large this effect may be in your case, but I do know from prior lab experience that it can be a noticeable contributor to total heat flux, particularly when measured carefully.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Ellefson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 12 Apr 2013 17:57:32 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2670</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Malachi Heder says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2669</link>
			<description><![CDATA[That being said, we will be trying to eliminate environmental effects. This is mainly trying to stir up the air inside the lab to make opening/closing the door and walking past the hood less of an effect. Ideas are welcome :)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Malachi Heder</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 12 Apr 2013 16:47:47 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2669</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Malachi Heder says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2668</link>
			<description><![CDATA[We do see a difference in thermal efficiency. This would be a bigger problem if we were only comparing the active cell to the passive cell. In this experiment we plan to compare each cell to itself and then to the other. We will be running these calibrations and they will produce corresponding curves for Cell A and Cell B. These curves will be similar to the previous experiment of Cell 1.0 and Cell 1.1. They will correlate the input power to temperature and when we turn them around it will show us the output power using the temperature of the cells. So, we will have a baseline for each cell. Then we will load the active cell but not the control. We will then run an active run and compare each cell to its' baseline. In addition to that, we will compare the difference each cell shows from its baseline to the other.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Malachi Heder</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 12 Apr 2013 16:47:12 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2668</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2667</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Maybe off-topic, but Celani has an important message for researchers experimenting with his wires or similar wires: Subject: Danger of EXPLOSION: possible cathalitic effects even at low temperatures From: Francesco Celani Date: Fri, April 12, 2013 11:13 am http://22passi.blogspot.de/2013/04/e-intanto-celani-va.html]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 12 Apr 2013 16:03:16 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2667</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Johan Eriksson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2664</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I agree in that having 2.75/2.5 = 10% difference in the "gain" for two identical cells does tell to me that something is missing here. And this will make any test with another wire invalid for differences < 10% (at least in my mind..). A high res image of the setup would help in giving any type of meaningful feedback. And preferably a thermal image of the cells at full power. Have you verified the input power to the wires? I am assuming that there must be some feedback involved in controlling the power? Can you try to swap places of the cells to rule out differences in ambient conditions? ( In that case testing at one power level would be sufficient.)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Johan Eriksson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 12 Apr 2013 07:33:49 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2664</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Ellefson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2662</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Do you have a radiant barrier (mylar, etc) isolating these cells from the room and each other? If not, then the temperature variations of the different surfaces visible to each cell will cause a corresponding difference in their net radiant heat flux.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Ellefson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 12 Apr 2013 03:32:58 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2662</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>AlanG says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2660</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Any idea why the cells differ so much in their thermal efficiency? It looks like cell A is yielding about 10% more in terms of degrees rise per watt input. For this experiment, the cells should be as identical as possible to make the test cell vs. control cell comparison valid.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>AlanG</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 11 Apr 2013 22:28:03 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2660</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
