<?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, 05 May 2026 13:15:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/component/jcomments/feed/com_content/199" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>Phố Đông Village says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-8722</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Wow that was unusual. I just wrote an extremely long comment but after I clicked submit my comment didn't appear. Grrrr... well I'm not writing all that over again. Anyhow, just wanted to say wonderful blog!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Phố Đông Village</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 16 Nov 2016 15:18:01 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-8722</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Eric Walker says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1821</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I second Jones's comment about possible endotherm. It seems like as a matter of procedure we should not be throwing out the negative portions of the P_xs curve; I think they should be discounted against any positive portions of the curve, and then anything remaining above the error intervals used as the basis for a possible finding of excess heat. There are obvious limitations here. If the amount of purported endotherm exceeds what is possible to store chemically, then that is something to be dealt with itself. But neither should we assume a priori that LENR is an irreversible process; if we assume for the sake of argument that it exists, perhaps it can be reversed, and in periods of endotherm this is what is happening. I do not propose this as anything that is necessarily the most plausible explanation. Just that possible endotherm is a detail that we should be staying on top of in order to rule out another possible artifact.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Eric Walker</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 20 Jan 2013 22:25:11 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1821</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ryan Hunt says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1681</link>
			<description><![CDATA[We are live in both cells with 1.7 amps on each wire!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ryan Hunt</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jan 2013 05:07:05 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1681</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Harold Guy says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1680</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Could the H2 and He temperature differences simply reflect the different heat capacities of H2 and He? You can see in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_capacity that the difference is there. If there are significant convective flows in your cells you just might see a relationship between the temperatures that you measure, and the heat capacities of the gases in the cells. Have you looked at other gases besides H2 and He, like N2 and Ar. If you have, and there is no such relationship, that would be cool. Forgive me, but I have not been following your work to this point. It is way outside my rather limited area of competence, but is quite exciting.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Harold Guy</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jan 2013 02:39:32 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1680</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>AlanG says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1679</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The hydrogen loading process is thought to involve dissociation of H2 into monatomic hydrogen within the lattice. This is an endothermic process and more layers on the wire might accelerate it, resulting in lower temps for that cell. This would not explain lower temps in helium of course. As the loading approaches saturation it's possible that some H1 escapes back into the cell. Glass is known to be a catalyst for H1 recombination (exothermic) and this might cause a rise in T_GlassOut while the other temps are stable.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>AlanG</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 12 Jan 2013 23:50:54 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1679</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1678</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Is the direct heating run still planned for today (US time) immediately after the last power step in about an hour or for tomorrow?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 12 Jan 2013 23:36:05 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1678</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Jones Beene says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1676</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Endotherm, in the sense of "lost heat" as if there was a mystery heat sink - has been seen several times before in this kind of experiment - some far more obvious. For instance, Dr. Brian Ahern's work for EPRI found endotherm. My suggestion is to contact Brian for details - as it is too complicated to put into a few words. The anomaly of endotherm with some materials - may be part of a complete understanding and we have a hypothesis explaining both. Rgds]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Jones Beene</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 12 Jan 2013 22:08:34 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1676</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1675</link>
			<description><![CDATA[for cell 1.1 there seamed to be more loading at 57W Pin (around 174 degrees T Macor)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 12 Jan 2013 20:29:19 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1675</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>David Roberson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1674</link>
			<description><![CDATA[My program shows the glass out temperature is beginning to demonstrate a significant rise that exceeds the average noise floor. The remainder of the nearby data preceding this time period is well behaved. Data feed time reads:14:33, 1/12/2013 Hope this is not a false alarm! This is for cell 1.0.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>David Roberson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 12 Jan 2013 19:42:27 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1674</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1673</link>
			<description><![CDATA[From slide 3 http://www.22passi.it/coherence2012/coherence%2014%20dicembre%202012%20Celani%20wire.pdf Excess power was recorded at above 175 degrees]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 12 Jan 2013 19:41:50 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1673</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ake malhammar says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1672</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The part of the heat which is radiated from the wire to the outer environment depends on its temperature, its surface size, its emissivity and the ir-transparency of the glass. From the top of my head I have it that quartz glass is highly transparent to infrared radiation. I would tend to believe that pyrex glass is different because if the values for the two wires agree reasonably well it would indicate a poor ir-transmission which makes the thermal flow paths simpler and easier to control. However, the insulated cell looks good. As a very critical observer the only thing I consider dubious is that the thermal sensors my not be attached as state of the art. The danger is that the wires act as heat sinks and lower the temperature at the measure points. The wires should therefore be firmly attached to the object for at least a distance of 20 mm. Dental plastics will do it but it needs an UV-pistol to cure. With great care other types of glues can also be used.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ake malhammar</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 12 Jan 2013 18:50:14 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1672</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1668</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ryan Hunt: I think the active wire resistance is noisy because the current applied is too low, hampering measurements. The resistance of the heater wire was noisy too when power applied was near zero. Look: http://i.imgur.com/VEODV.png http://i.imgur.com/VEODV.png Try temporarily increasing input power to the active wire to a few milliwatts, it shouldn't increase temperatures significantly, but it should make resistance readings more stable. EDIT: or were you referring to long period noise (slow oscillations) instead?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2013 23:38:52 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1668</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ryan Hunt says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1667</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I think maybe the 2 layer wire in 1.1 already dropped most of its resistance while we were playing in Helium. With only 2 layers, I think this is behaving much more like a plain Isotan wire. Both wires have a fairly noisy resistance signal. There have been some suggestions that this may be due to hydrogen gas convection currents inside the cell disturbing the temperature of the wire. I don't know.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ryan Hunt</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2013 23:29:50 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1667</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1666</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Arnaud: the 2-layer wire installed in cell v1.1 is the of the same type used by STM Microelectronic s / Ubaldo Mastromatteo in recently reported experiments, and has been found to show the anomalous heating effect at higher temperatures than wire with more layers. So it could be that it also needs higher temperatures to show the electrical resistance anomaly. The only way to find out is by increasing power to the heater wire or waiting for the active heating run (power directly applied to the active wire).]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2013 23:27:49 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1666</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Arnaud says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1665</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ecco : Wire on cell 1.1 is showing an increase of resistance while temp is going up. The Celani's magic is gone for this one. I'm pretty sure. Wire on cell 1.0 has shown firstly an increase of R which inline with celanis claims. It is a good 1st step. Then when T° mica reached 160°C, a very slow but steady decrease of the R and still going down. But this is very very slow. After 2 hours, R/RO = 15.52/15.75 = 0985. Celanis showed a faster decrease of R/R0. This wire has a problem too, but still worth a try. As I said before, I hope I'm wrong, but 1st signs aren't good.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Arnaud</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2013 23:18:13 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1665</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1663</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Arnaud: Power was applied at 22:00 GMT. You have to check data from that. On Cell v1.1 "Resistance (Red)" appears to be just increasing with temperature and input power, while on v.1.0 it's slowly but constantly decreasing. Cell v1.1 has a 2-layer active wire, while cell v1.0 has a 14-layer active wire. Perhaps in indirect heating conditions even more heat is needed for the 2-layer wire to show typical effects. The heater wire (and the glass tube) should be able to withstand up to 100 watts of power. I don't know if the USA team is going to ramp up power up to that level.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2013 23:01:55 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1663</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Arnaud says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1662</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Did u load with H2 at around 21:30 GMT ? Or is it still He loaded instead ? With H2, the reistance of celani wire should have dropped in both cells. But neithier one has shown any significant drop of resistance. There are also glitches when power on NiChrome is applied . Is it possible to isolate the measurements of the 2 powers a little more ? Did you fried de wires ? Hope I'm wrong here]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Arnaud</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2013 22:53:14 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1662</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1659</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I think you currently need to increase current to the active wire a tiny bit to get good impedance readings. They have a lot of noise at the moment.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2013 21:06:52 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1659</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
