<?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>Fri, 08 May 2026 18:00:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/de/component/jcomments/feed/com_content/255" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>laptop labs says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-10319</link>
			<description><![CDATA[always i used to read smaller articles which as well clear their motive, and that is also happening with this article which I am reading at this place.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>laptop labs</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2020 21:33:30 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-10319</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>damage computers says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-10318</link>
			<description><![CDATA[There is noticeably a lot to identify about this. I believe you made certain good points in features also.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>damage computers</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2020 19:45:17 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-10318</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RosemarieJuicy says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-9308</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Hi. I see that you don't update your site too often. I know that writing articles is time consuming and boring. But did you know that there is a tool that allows you to create new posts using existing content (from article directories or other blogs from your niche)? And it does it very well. The new articles are unique and pass the copyscape test. Search in google and try: miftolo's tools]]></description>
			<dc:creator>RosemarieJuicy</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 29 Sep 2018 04:21:14 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-9308</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Susan Clark says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-8967</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Rest room marketing techniques you pertinent query previous to building. Will probably be quick to write down remarkable write-up because of this.	streaming complet]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Susan Clark</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 02 Jan 2018 12:34:26 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-8967</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2979</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I'm not quite sure what the magic was/is but I now have up-to-date data coming from the CTC. Yea! It's of interest to note that the resistance continues on its downward journey. Hopefully no one will lose patience on this test setup and stop it because as we've seen in the other cells, the pattern is for the resistance to continue to drop and then at some point it will reverse directions and then we will start to see excess power.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 02 Jun 2013 14:28:34 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2979</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2852</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ecco Your suggestion is good, very limited options for triggering, stimulation and acceleration, but one to consider.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 13 May 2013 14:52:31 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2852</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2851</link>
			<description><![CDATA[As long as the cell is under water, what goes in has to come out somehow. Insulation could be as simple as a closed steel tube containing air/mild vacuum, to which the stick could be screwed on like a cartridge heater, if the problem is direct heat removal by water cooling. But the intended advantages of this experiment are: - Being simple -> by reducing the testing apparatus to the minimum complexity needed to show excess heat. - Being cheap -> by not requiring expensive controls, sensors, equipment and materials. - Being straightforward -> output energy calculation can be performed just by knowing the amount of water, its temperature and time elapsed. - Removing or averaging out all possible variables -> all the above + the large amount of water and long time constant ensuring that small variations in testing conditions are not very relevant anymore. Mass flow calorimetry is of course very welcome and needed, but would it fulfill all the above?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 12 May 2013 14:47:46 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2851</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2850</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ecco I understand the heat loss from the stick into the fluid would be too fast and result in lowering of the temperature of the reactor below the threshold in which it is susceptible to some form of triggering. The steel and glass cell maintains a high core temperature by having a lower pressure gas in the space between the glass and the steel. Maybe some insulation could be done on the stick though that would be equivalent. I think the next version though might be fluid mass flow.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 12 May 2013 13:52:31 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2850</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2847</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@MFMP Brainstorming: as a side-experiment what about submerging the cartridge heating element (the "stick") of the CTC cell in a relatively large container containing a known amount of water (say 100 liters) and attempting to calculate output energy by the rise in water temperature sampled from multiple spots over a certain amount of time? This would be the simplest and least expensive experiment that could be made with Celani wires. It would have the advantage of greatly reducing cell complexity compared to the steel&glass cell assembled in Europe and making calibrations optional (though still useful to improve accuracy), although it would probably not be extremely precise over short periods of time. If needed, water could be replaced by some kind of oil or a water/ethylene glycol mix with a known heat capacity, although it would get more expensive.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 12 May 2013 00:38:19 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2847</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Malachi Heder says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2836</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@ Ecco That was my fault. I meant 82.5 cm, not inches :) And I put it in the wrong experimental log. This has been fixed. Sorry for the mix up!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Malachi Heder</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 10 May 2013 14:08:35 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2836</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2834</link>
			<description><![CDATA[From the experiment log: I wasn't aware there was a "Cell B" ! At 82.5", or 2095mm in SI units, this is 5 times more wire mass than what is currently installed in "Cell A" (400mm). Will this cell need new calibrations or has it already been calibrated and therefore could new experimentation s start as soon as the wire has been fitted? (I might have missed something here)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 09 May 2013 20:40:49 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2834</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>AlanG says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2832</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ecco The resistance spikes look like 1-sample transients related to the sudden drop in voltage. Maybe back-emf from the stray inductance of the wire in the cell, or grounding cross-talk. http://magicsound.us/MFMP/R_spike.jpg]]></description>
			<dc:creator>AlanG</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 09 May 2013 19:41:11 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2832</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2826</link>
			<description><![CDATA[After some delay, data appears to be back online. Regarding this test as documented in the experiment log: Interesting things seem to be going on with wire resistance and internal pressure: http://i.imgur.com/RwUm1P0.png http://i.imgur.com/mvB4ZTl.png http://i.imgur.com/uxNJ0hr.png]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 09 May 2013 00:09:37 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2826</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2824</link>
			<description><![CDATA[It looks like live data is offline at the moment - is there a problem or is the entire cell still off?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 08 May 2013 22:20:49 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2824</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Malachi Heder says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2815</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@ Ecco As far as the averaging is concerned, we are in the final stages of testing the new software. This will fix that problem.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Malachi Heder</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 06 May 2013 16:29:38 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2815</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2799</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Robert Greenyer: thanks for finally attempting that. I'm looking forward to seeing that test.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 03 May 2013 08:38:27 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2799</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2798</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ecco Well, we have been discussing it (and specifically in response to your repeated requests). The good news is - this cell can withstand very high pressures.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 03 May 2013 06:51:32 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2798</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2795</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@MFMP: While you're debugging the software, could you start some other side test or does that prevent any further tampering with cell parameters? It could be an idea to try loading the wire at a higher pressure for example. Not holding my breath, but that could be what is needed to achieve some excess heat at lower pressures, once it's been performed.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 02 May 2013 22:25:28 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2795</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>clovis says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2791</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Hi, guys, i love the geiger counter, i belive that i suggested that first, a good while back, it could prove to be useful, gamma's ar important but so are a few of the others as well, Ir,rf,and neutrinos, but most important is you guys being safe, because without you guys,----- we would have to find replacements, lol]]></description>
			<dc:creator>clovis</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 02 May 2013 15:55:46 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2791</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2789</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@MFMP: the post updates aren't getting through the RSS feed (although they used to), so you might want to write related comments to make people more readily aware of them.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 01 May 2013 22:26:36 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2789</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2788</link>
			<description><![CDATA[It looks like the cell is now back to the power in = power out condition.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 01 May 2013 20:34:11 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2788</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ryan Hunt says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2786</link>
			<description><![CDATA[We found a bug in the sensor board input configuration that was causing it to essentially subtract the pressure sensor voltage signal from the power voltage signal. The result was that the board under read the voltage and was putting more power into the cell to compensate. This problem started Monday when we moved it to the new computer. That's why the readings were immediately higher when we turned it onto the live data feed. We are now rechecking and re-zeroing the inputs to make sure everything is as close as possible, even at low power levels.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ryan Hunt</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 01 May 2013 18:41:35 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2786</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>AlanG says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2785</link>
			<description><![CDATA[At this resolution, instrumentation front-end noise could be an issue. Type K TCs are 41 uV/C, so the range of the "sawtooth" data fluctuation is less than 4 uV P-P and it doesn't look inter-correlate d: http://magicsound.us/MFMP/CTC1.jpg The RTD sensors used in this experiment are probably a bit less sensitive to front-end noise but may be more sensitive to external fields. Someone mentioned RFI a while back. Is the reactor tube properly grounded? Look for RF on the sensor wires with an analog scope (assuming they're accessible). More RF suppression caps could be added across each of them if needed. .]]></description>
			<dc:creator>AlanG</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 01 May 2013 17:18:41 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2785</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Roderick Vos says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2784</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ryan So testing the acetone is possible with the current equipment, nice! I also get confused about the cell designs sometimes. Maybe some pictures could be added to the lab view program so you can check the design as well as the results of the experiments.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Roderick Vos</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 01 May 2013 16:58:24 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2784</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2783</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ryan Hunt: I admit I am starting to lose track of how every cell is made exactly. I assumed this one still had a transparent glass tube for the inner active wire container.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 01 May 2013 16:13:28 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2783</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ryan Hunt says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2782</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The cell int his apparatus is a 1/4 inch OD stainless tube that goes inside a calorimeter. The wires are inside the stainless tube. This would be ideal to test the acetone. First, I aim to figure out if we are seeing a calibration issue or some real excess energy.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ryan Hunt</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 01 May 2013 16:00:31 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2782</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2781</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Roderick Vos: that is just my opinion. I think the MFMP team would still like to try that in the CTC calorimeter. @Ryan Hunt: good to know you're attempting that (although a much nicer plot would be possible if the steps were in 1/4 watts - but not that it would be useful if this turns out to be a problem in the calibration). By the way, it appears there are problems in the public data feed as it seems to be stuck at 17:13.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 01 May 2013 15:39:46 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2781</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Roderick Vos says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2779</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ecco: Thanks for the response. So the actone experiment would need a redesign of the reactor which requires time and money. To bad, should have known things are almost never that easy. Maybe it should be the next experiment then. Lets first see what we can learn from this set-up. Also hope Celani publishes something soon so we can all take a look at his results, i am sure they are interesting.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Roderick Vos</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 01 May 2013 15:34:56 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2779</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Roderick Vos says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2776</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Great work! nice to see live experiments again, those are always the most exciting. I do wonder why adding acetone is designated as a 'Possible future experiment'. Additional excess power makes it more convincing and allows for a larger margin of error in the measurements. Shouldn't we try to do this a.s.a.p.?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Roderick Vos</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 01 May 2013 14:22:10 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2776</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Malachi Heder says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2775</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@ Ecco As we put more and more HUGnetlab boards on one computer we are finding that it is taking too long between reads and so the updater to the server checks just before the records are available. The results are new data points every few min, like you have observed. The new software, which should fix this, is getting close to a release.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Malachi Heder</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 01 May 2013 14:19:55 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2775</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2774</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Cubic fit of the excess power data from the past few hours: http://i.imgur.com/EeiI0ZD.png http://i.imgur.com/EeiI0ZD.png More data points needed]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 01 May 2013 00:31:56 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2774</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2773</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Robert Greenyer: well, before taking the wire off it should be interesting (and most of all, fun) to see if large disturbances to input power disrupt this effect or not (in which case it might indeed point to some systematic error). I would myself try lowering input power further to 2-2.5W, then give it a jolt to max power (25W?), then again to very low power, for example. By the way, it appears that the live data page for the CTC cell is updating only every 10 minutes or so.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2013 23:28:43 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2773</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2772</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@AlanG Thanks for the observations]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2013 23:14:50 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2772</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2771</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ecco You are right about the %ages - we are still trying to establish if this is a systematic issue or find another way to disprove it. We may just take the 400L wire out and see if the same thing occurs. This is just a dummy run. One thing to note is that in Celani's V2 protocol runs, he saw a peak excess power around 15W and then a drop off at higher input powers.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2013 23:11:40 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2771</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>AlanG says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2770</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I did an estimate of the oxide reduction based on some info in Celani's patent in a comment here: http://tinyurl.com/csqgt79 It looks like almost half of the hydrogen could be involved. I made a number of assumptions that might be incorrect but it's a place to start. One other useful clue in the patent: initial loading with H2 at 5 bar, 150C "reached saturation in approximately 500 seconds" with an atomic loading factor of 0.65. Celani describes this later as "activation of the surface...to reduce both its oxides and its silica". I think this patent is for a single layer wire.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>AlanG</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2013 22:43:08 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2770</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2769</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Assuming that output power calculations on the live data page are correct (as usual there might be potential for errors due to the effects of lowering pressure when lowering power / hydrogen leak over time), it seems that the apparent excess is in proportion much larger at low power than it was at higher one. Currently 3.0W in, ~3.6W out which is 20% excess, opposed to the previous 12.0W in, 12.9W out, which would be slightly more than 7% excess. It would be interesting to see if lowering input power further in 0.4-0.5W steps makes said excess power hold more and/or reach a threshold under which it shuts off abruptly. BTW: the comments RSS feed in the "Celani Replication" section is also for all comments in every other blog section in quantumheat.org so you could add it to the navigation bar above (and in the steel&glass cell section).]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2013 22:42:26 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2769</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
