<?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>Thu, 30 Apr 2026 15:28:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/component/jcomments/feed/com_content/112" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>freethinker says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-156</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Yes I see the same behaviour for T_Well.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>freethinker</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 10 Nov 2012 19:24:09 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-156</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ryan Hunt says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-154</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I have not examined the P/T data, yet. I find your questions very intriguing. Could you look at the same thing with T_well? I appreciate all these suggestions. It is a little overwhelming to try to absorb all of them right away, but they will be contemplated and either acted upon in this experiment if practical, or included into the next version of the experiment. As far as a good forum for experimental methods, I think we could either create a thread in the discussion area, or you could link to a document from this comment area.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ryan Hunt</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 10 Nov 2012 17:57:11 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-154</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>123star says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-147</link>
			<description><![CDATA[oh: lcd made the same objection as mine! :eek:]]></description>
			<dc:creator>123star</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2012 22:27:54 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-147</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>123star says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-146</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Note: before I was talking about the glass casing temperature because I find it much more "reliable" than the wire or mica temperature for obvious reasons]]></description>
			<dc:creator>123star</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2012 22:17:58 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-146</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>123star says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-145</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Hi guys, nice job! I haven't read all your posts yet, could you please restate how many temperature probes there are, and where. Some time ago at ecatnews.com we argued that there could be temperature variations along the glass casing which can't be detected by "spot" calorimetry (i.e. measuring temperature only at certain places). Even if you detect a temperature increase with the Hydrogen loaded wire, that would not be conclusive, but if you manage to prove that the temperature is rising everywhere along the glass casing, this would be sufficient to conclude that there is excess heat production.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>123star</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2012 22:14:12 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-145</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>David Roberson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-144</link>
			<description><![CDATA[It looks like you have made several calibration runs on the first chart. If these are from the earlier calibration I think it would be wise to run several from the new wiring. The temperature that you are noting this time might just be an extreme reading due to variation. Be careful about adjusting the chart values without a proven reason as this leaves open a large door for skeptics to enter. Do the other temperature readings, particularly of the glass, follow this increase? I would expect the glass temperature to be more filtered and thus consistent if your theory for the difference is correct.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>David Roberson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2012 21:37:36 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-144</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>lcd  says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-143</link>
			<description><![CDATA[How do you rule out above avg temperature variations locally at the temperature probe sights. If you don't then the avg temperature or output energy could be the same even though you are measuring higher temperature. Am I missing something? I didn't read every detail so it's entirely possible. Very hopeful you guys verify excess heat. I donated. :)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>lcd </dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2012 20:36:14 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-143</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Sanjeev says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-142</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Celani gives the resistance value of about 17 ohm for 105cm long wire, so I guess your values are ok. Here is the report for anyone who wants to compare the plots, but he uses R/Ro ratio. http://www.22passi.it/downloads/Celani_ICCF17_Trasp3.pdf However, I wonder why the other wires show odd behavior. Especially the cal1 seems to be messy data.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Sanjeev</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2012 20:32:39 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-142</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Patrik says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-141</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Very intersting. Thanks for the update.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Patrik</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2012 20:10:37 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-141</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ryan Hunt says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-140</link>
			<description><![CDATA[We are heating wit the Celani wire. we did replace the NiChrome wire. We didn't want any dissolved hydrogen coming out of it. And we did save the original wire. So, we could swap it back in in that particular, if it seems necessary. If we see a large signal we probably won't bother. If we see little or none, then we probably will have to.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ryan Hunt</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2012 20:03:19 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-140</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>David Jones says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-139</link>
			<description><![CDATA[What you have not stated is if you are heating via the nichrome or Celani wire?, I assume the latter. If the nichrome wire was undisturbed when you replaced the isotan wire with Celani’s wire then heating with that wire should give you a reference position.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>David Jones</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2012 19:58:13 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-139</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>David Jones says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-135</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The odd behaviour of the impedance of the wire in the calibration runs looks like a possible experimental artefact to me. I would suggest that this needs to be tested carefully and ruled out. Otherwise, you leave an opening for doubt in your experimental method.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>David Jones</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2012 19:28:46 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-135</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>David Jones says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-133</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Any opinions? Do as you suggest. Once all your runs are finished reinstall the original wire used for the calibration runs so that it finishes one wrap before the end and rerun to test. Might I also suggest that you carefully photo/video each set up so that you have a reference resource if you need to replicate any previous experiment. I suspect you do this anyway but no harm in stating the obvious!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>David Jones</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2012 19:14:22 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-133</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>freethinker says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-132</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Yes, worked like a charm :)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>freethinker</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2012 17:31:25 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-132</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ryan Hunt says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-131</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Sorry. Fixed the link. Enjoy.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ryan Hunt</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2012 17:29:05 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-131</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>freethinker says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-130</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Sorry could not access the file. Got this when tried: The requested URL /data/calibrati ons/Master_Spre adsheet11-9.xls was not found on this server.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>freethinker</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2012 17:14:41 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-130</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>freethinker says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-129</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Nice going guys!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>freethinker</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2012 17:13:06 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-129</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
