<?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, 14 Apr 2026 22:55:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/component/jcomments/feed/com_content/130" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>Parking Sensors says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-9128</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Hi there Dear, are you genuinely visiting this website regularly, if so afterward you will absolutely get nice knowledge.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Parking Sensors</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 05 Jun 2018 06:36:59 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-9128</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Parking Sensors says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-9127</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Hi there Dear, are you genuinely visiting this website regularly, if so afterward you will absolutely get nice knowledge.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Parking Sensors</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 05 Jun 2018 06:36:30 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-9127</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ryan Hunt says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-334</link>
			<description><![CDATA[You guys are quick. New blog entry explains it.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ryan Hunt</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2012 18:13:34 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-334</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Al Potenza says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-333</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Your results suggest that you could improve the experiment by using true heat flow transducers to measure the actual heat passing through the glass envelope. In the alternative, you could fluid cool the glass envelope with temperature-reg ulated coolant using a jacket or container for the existing device. That would enable you to perform flow calorimetry on the coolant by measuring its delta-T and flow rate. I realize that flow calorimetry raises the difficulty and cost. If you think that the effect you are looking for is so large that it will be very obvious, then you won't need it. If the effect is more subtle, maybe the complexity is worth it. You seem to be demonstrating very nicely the problems with using spot temperature measurements instead of true calorimetry.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Al Potenza</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2012 18:04:42 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-333</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>123star says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-332</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ryan (I think) Ok, maybe before I misread, are you saying that the Celani wire (RunHe2, right?) is black, so it should have a high emissivity, and should be colder (with the same power input), and yet the thermocouples give a higher temperature reading?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>123star</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2012 17:52:57 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-332</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-331</link>
			<description><![CDATA[As of now it appears that after vacuuming the cell the the MFMP team started injecting hydrogen again at a reduced pressure. No power applied yet.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2012 17:34:34 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-331</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-329</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@GreenWin: input power has been switched on/off a couple times. It is currently off and as far as I can see, there's no thermal anomaly ongoing. I think they have done something with the power supply fan since before the latest switchoff the usual voltage dip (due to periodic fan activation) did not appear anymore. Maybe there there have been problems with it?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2012 16:55:22 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-329</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>GreenWin says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-328</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Am I correct to assume the experiment is not running - or not feeding the HUGnet database?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>GreenWin</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2012 16:51:06 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-328</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-327</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Do you have a voltage sense line in the power supply setup? If so, what is it connected to If it's connected at the load, what is the length/gauge of the wires for both the load and the sense lines?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2012 15:22:39 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-327</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Achi says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-326</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Please ignore me if I'm wrong, since I'm just an observer making a comment on something I know very little about. From what I've understood from the many LENR theories I've read a smoother surface on the wire would lend itself to being less reactive in both the loading stages and the burning stages. From what I understand the rougher surface allows the H more surface area to penetrate the metal lattice, and also more surface area to be active in the reaction. That might explain the temp differences. But like I said, I'm just a lay observer who only knows what he's read.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Achi</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2012 15:18:14 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-326</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>David Jones says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-325</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@ Ecco You are almost correct. This would help - but contamination of the vessel would occur. But, surprisingly some loss of hydrogen would also still occur - but at a very very reduced rate and probably so small as to be Irrelevant.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>David Jones</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2012 15:11:48 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-325</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>David Jones says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-324</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Since almost no one is one is posting at the moment I’m going to labour the point. Imagine the Celani wire is operating in a vacuum. With a thermocouple on a quartz glass outer tube that are both totally transparent at all wavelengths i.e. can only absorb/measure conducted heat. Then no temperature rise will be recorded at that thermocouple (assuming no electromagnetic absorption in the surrounding air). But if some mica is in contact/close with/to the wire and you also record the temperature of the mica you will notice the temperature rise in the mica.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>David Jones</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2012 15:06:11 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-324</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-323</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Oh, missed the ambient temp drop. it seems to drop off at about the same time.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2012 14:59:08 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-323</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>David Jones says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-320</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Another useful item is to have a gas reservoir (metal tube) of volume very much greater than your active chamber. This obviously reduces the variation of gas pressure over time in the event of a leak - as experimental setups like yours using hydrogen are almost impossible to get gas tight.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>David Jones</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2012 14:47:44 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-320</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>David Jones says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-318</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Possible answer for differences between glassout and mica ('possible') excess energy readings - they are observing different things. The mica reading will include conduction, convection and radiated heat from the wire. The glassout will record far less radiated heat as you have shown (much to my surprise at these low temperatures for quartz glass!). Thus if a large proportion of heat loss is via radiation, glassout will not record it - whereas the mica temp will. Mica is a very good infrared emitter (absorber) – radiant fires are made from mica. This is why I suggested monitoring the mica temp, as, it might more readily show up an effect – even though it is subject to more noise and calibration spread.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>David Jones</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2012 14:12:39 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-318</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Sanjeev says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-311</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Stefan-Boltzman eqn will be ideal but we need emissivity value for your glass tube.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Sanjeev</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2012 08:49:20 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-311</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-310</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Not related with the calibration issues described above, but at 2012-11-14 7:30 at the Celani1 cell there was a sudden increase of ambient temperature, which now has a cyclical pattern in the form of a temperature spike recurring roughly every 8 minutes. This has marginally affected reactor temperatures. What happened / what was turned on?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 14 Nov 2012 08:22:31 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-310</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
