<?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 12:07:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/component/jcomments/feed/com_content/202" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>Chuck says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1933</link>
			<description><![CDATA[#122, @CharlieTapp: To the best of my knowledge, constantan wire is used primarily in theromocouples. Most common is iron-constantan and copper-constant an. Related nickel-based TC wires are Chromel and Alumel (both more than 90 percent nickel). Since constantan is only about 45 percent nickel and the reaction expected is H-Ni, perhaps a more nickel-rich alloy might give stronger results. I'm not entirely clear on what part copper plays in the overall picture. In fact, constantan theromocouples are used in industry where hydrogen is used as a reducing atmosphere, such as a continuous galvanize line in the steel industry, not to mention in the production of hydrogen itself from methane. So it's not as if the combination of hydrogen and constantan at elevated temperatures has never happened before.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Chuck</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jan 2013 20:50:52 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1933</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1927</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Ged, It would seem possible to a 1 minute (Nyquist limit ) resolution with the existing data. A nice digital storage scope on a few inputs/outputs would really be interesting. Would you like to borrow one?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jan 2013 00:39:49 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1927</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ged says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1926</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Robert, Really looking forward to this update. The data has been interesting so far, a lot of very good stuff developing. I wonder if we can figure out the impulse response of the control system; as that would give a very powerful mathematical tool for detecting excess heat (or any other perturbation of the system's function).]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ged</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jan 2013 00:11:48 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1926</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1925</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I guess I was wrong with my idea of MFMP's plans for today :lol: (referring to the cooling off step started a while ago)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 23:04:52 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1925</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1924</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Robert Greenyer: ok, I guess we'll have to wait and see. Anyway, regarding the cells currently being tested in the US: if it doesn't interfere with David Roberson's test (since the last power step has lasted more than 90 minutes and I feel the US team is going to leave it like that overnight), I wonder if would be possible to explore higher temperatures by raising input power to the active wire at like 50-52 watts (like last time) and to the heater wire at 85-90 watts or more if glass temperatures and the wire allow (the heater wire definitely should be able to take the load). That's for testing the possible positive temperature feedback effect that the wire is supposed to have. At some point temperatures should rise significantly more than what input power alone would suggest.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 22:28:06 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1924</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1921</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ecco / All I think most of these questions are going to become redundant in the near future. We will be preparing a post over the next few days that will explain what I mean.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 20:54:56 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1921</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1920</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Of course, what I proposed would need new calibrations, etc. I'm not sure if this is feasible with wires that are already loaded.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 20:29:36 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1920</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ryan Hunt says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1918</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The blue channel power supply is independent of everything else. The T_ambient is a thermocouple and is likely being affected by the door (from the outdoors at -21C) opening briefly before and after the adjustment. If you look carefully at the voltage, it is also affected the ambient, but only in the tenths of millivolts.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ryan Hunt</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 19:36:59 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1918</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1917</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Is the power for the blue channel wire also the same power supply that's feeding the sensor power for the thermistors? The reason I ask is that the ambient temp is following the power transitions with big drops in ambient just when the power is ramped up. It would seem that the request for current on the blue channel is coupling into the ambient sensor.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 19:29:58 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1917</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ryan Hunt says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1916</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The cells do have hydrogen in them. It will be interesting to see if the P_xs rises above zero at all now that we are re-warming it.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ryan Hunt</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 18:55:03 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1916</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1915</link>
			<description><![CDATA[During the cal testing that's ongoing, is the cell filled with hydrogen? It would seem that if excess power is generated then that will be the cal values for no excess power. At the temps we're seeing now, it would be expected that excess power could be generated.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 18:43:44 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1915</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ryan Hunt says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1908</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Must be just the air flow disruption. I don't know what else might account for that.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ryan Hunt</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 17:04:25 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1908</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>David Roberson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1907</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Do you guys have an explanation as to why the T_GlassOut waveform for cell 1.0 begins rising before the Pin has been applied? The Power input has began at 11:34 and is stable within about a minute, but the outer glass temperature has already begun its rise by about a degree or more ahead of this time. Could this be due to the motion of people in the room stirring up the air currents as they prepare to adjust the power? I just noticed that the curve for cell 1.1 also has an unusual behavior just prior to the input power setting. These effects should show up in my simulation error report. The curves will most likely not be a super match at the initial edges.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>David Roberson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 16:58:47 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1907</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1905</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ron B: personally, not having followed closely what happened to the EU Cell (also because of lack of communication by the EU testing team), I can't say whether the excess heat reported is actual or apparent. I seem to remember having read that the P_Out/Xs calculation formula hasn't been set in place correctly yet, but I'm not 100% sure. By the way, power has just started being applied to the heater wires on the US cells. It's going to be ramped up in three 1.5 hour long steps.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 15:25:34 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1905</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1904</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I see the Euro cell is back in action and really doing great. With power only on the active wire it can reach the critical temps and showing quite a bit of excess power. Excellent!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 15:15:16 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1904</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1902</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I hoped too to see power applied to the heater wire immediately after the stepped test on the active wire; not only because of anticipation but also because I think it is in your best interest to minimize the effects of decreasing internal pressure over time on temperature readings.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 11:07:05 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1902</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>David Roberson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1899</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Is the plan to keep the power at the Celani maximum for the remainder of the evening? I was hoping that we would begin the power steps with the heating wire soon after completing the Celani maximum level run. So far the curve fit is very good for the Celani wire. Thanks.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>David Roberson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 01:53:41 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1899</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Dieter Seeliger says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1897</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ryan, your fast as light ! Perfect !!! Dieter]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Dieter Seeliger</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2013 20:56:25 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1897</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ryan Hunt says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1896</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@ Dieter - Column E is now UTC in the experiment log.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ryan Hunt</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2013 20:31:28 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1896</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Dieter Seeliger says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1895</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ryan, is there any chance to note all the timestamps in UTC. It`s a mess to calculate back all the local time messages or events in the live view, log and comments. BR Dieter]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Dieter Seeliger</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2013 19:47:29 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1895</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>David Roberson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1894</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The ambient for cell 1.0 is not behaving properly. Any idea what is happening? Actually the ambient for both cells is strange.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>David Roberson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2013 19:14:05 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1894</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ryan Hunt says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1893</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The control signal for cell 1.0 didn't work the first time. It is started again. That is the first time such a thing has happened.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ryan Hunt</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2013 18:19:41 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1893</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1892</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Is the current run only for one cell at a time or did you forget to apply power to the 1.0 cell too?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2013 18:09:18 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1892</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1891</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@MFMP: even though they are not being heated, I think both cells show that some amount of loading occurred as you injected hydrogen, so you may need to increase pressure again to the proper starting values.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2013 16:49:20 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1891</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Bernie Koppenhofer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1890</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Pulsing is also used to "load".]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Bernie Koppenhofer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2013 16:31:53 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1890</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Bernie Koppenhofer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1889</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Ecco....I agree pulsing is used to help clean in many "natural" situations.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Bernie Koppenhofer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2013 16:23:42 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1889</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1888</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@MFMP: I see you are applying small power to active wires under vacuum to improve flushing. Are you able on the Quartz cell to measure wire temperature with the IR sensor? Just to see how hot the wire gets at these levels. Additional note: this is just a wild idea of mine with no real foundation, but I was thinking that relatively rapidly cycling power to the wires on and off (like 15 seconds on, 15 seconds off or something similar) at this stage could make helium/hydrogen deloading quicker, more effective. This could be monitored by checking out wire resistance behavior over time. I don't think it would harm trying with the same power level currently constantly applied.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 23 Jan 2013 15:44:26 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1888</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1873</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@MFMP: I see the system is back up, good job. While you wait to fully define David Roberson's calibration procedure, could you make an overnight high pressure test aimed to see if hydrogen gets loaded some more (P_xs values would therefore not have any validity since there are no calibrations for such runs - they should be significantly lower than at 1 bar anyway) or are there constraints preventing this such as the need of having the exact same testing conditions as during the previous run, running more equipment consistency tests and the like?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2013 23:31:19 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1873</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Giorgio says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1868</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@AlphaBeta#88 The 2N4401 is a small signal transistor (0.6W, 0.5A) but in avalanche mode you can have a very small duty cycle and so you can reach more than 200W (two hundred watts) of PEAK power with an AVERAGE dissipation of less than 0.1W (zero point 1 watts)! see this datasheet for ZTX415: http://www.diodes.com/datasheets/ZTX415.pdf This is also a small signal transistor (0.68W 0.5A max) but reaches 60A in avalanche mode! If you want more details please write on the new thread on triggering in "Collaborate" menu.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Giorgio</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2013 21:33:56 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1868</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>AlphaBeta says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1867</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ more than 200W peak on 50 ohm load? Really? V = sqrt(200*50) = sqrt(10000) = 100V peak I = 100/50 = 2A peak Looking the dat-sheet of the component at link: http://www.onsemi.com/pub_link/Collateral/2N4401-D.PDF it seems that this transistor can't work at these values.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>AlphaBeta</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2013 20:10:56 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1867</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1863</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@All The Collaborate mini-project for triggering experiment apparatus design and test protocol is up on the Collaborate section. Please consider signing up and getting actively involved. The document is live so anyone can view and Collaborators can edit the document and do literature / patent reviews, provide sources and inspire us all to develop the best way to make the Celani wires ROCK! If we can get this done over the coming four months - we can submit the review paper or tested suggestions as a paper for review or poster session at ICCF-18 and active collaborators adding value to the document would be listed as co-authors. In fact we would like to do this with all of the mini-projects we are cooking up. More to come. http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/collaborate/203-new-fire-triggering-potential-means-and-equipment-design]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2013 18:29:43 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1863</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Giorgio says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1861</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Alain#82 Using a 0.1$ transistor as 2N4401, you can generate (at 1KHZ) few tens of nanoseconds wide pulses of more than 200W peak power on a pure resistive load of 50 ohm using less the 0.1W of average input power!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Giorgio</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2013 17:59:20 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1861</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Giorgio says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1860</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Alain#82 To address this problem you can use the simple formula: 0.5*C*V*V*N (where C is the Capacity in Farad, V the voltage of the full charged capacitor and N the number of pulses in a second) for computing an UPPER limit of the output power from the avalanche pulser.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Giorgio</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2013 17:34:08 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1860</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1859</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Ryan, Sorry about the hard drive issue, stuff happens :o Since the H pressure doesn't seem to really affect the amount of excess heat directly it might be fun to try a bit more pressure since there's some indication that more pressure causes the resistance to drop faster. I believe you are right and that the active wire is just about soaked.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2013 17:23:57 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1859</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Alain Coetmeur says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1857</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ note that seen with mizunon (and rossi), the measure of power is a very important subject. wattmeter can be wrong if high frequency is present. best can be to make slow pulse first (few per second, with bandwidth below 1kHz)... don't forget that pathoskeptics tak any opportunity to reject claims...]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Alain Coetmeur</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2013 17:18:30 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1857</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ryan Hunt says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1856</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@ Ecco and everyone. We have a hard drive on the fritz on the computer watching the experiment. The output power got reset in the process of troubleshooting so we are letting the cell cool while we run a hard drive diagnostic. If the Helium had penetrated the cell and is slowly being replaced by Hydrogen, my gut thinks that cycling down and back up may help it. Either way, it'll be interesting to observe. Should we replace the hydrogen? Any thoughts? @ Dave Roberson - I think we'll try a test like you want - I emailed you directly to try to clarify the steps you want. @ Clovis - Our goal is to make this effect repeatable and demonstrable. Once we get an effect we can make happen again and again, it will serve as an awesome lab rat for all kinds of experiments to test and understand the real process.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ryan Hunt</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2013 17:07:48 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1856</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>clovis ray says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1855</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ if you guys really beleive you have excess heat and have good data to prove it, then why not use one of the cells the best one seems to be the quartz one , and use it as a super cell, one you can run some radical catalest , and different materials and use in maybe a totaly different senero, go out for the lone one, give you creative mind a try,]]></description>
			<dc:creator>clovis ray</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2013 16:55:24 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1855</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>clovis ray says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1854</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ron b hi. i like the pure power idea and useing batterys, but rember even a battery uses power, how about using a cap.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>clovis ray</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2013 16:40:07 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1854</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>David Roberson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1853</link>
			<description><![CDATA[This would be an excellent opportunity to begin the calibration run I requested. Give it plenty of time to cool down for best results. Thanks guys, I appreciate it very much.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>David Roberson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2013 16:36:43 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1853</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1852</link>
			<description><![CDATA[#76 Alain Coetmeur et al As I had talked about in an earlier post, it would seem that the edge speed of the power on transitions (slew rate) is important as well. Since I think that's an unknown at this point with the current power supplies it seems it would be important to know what the cells currently are experiencing with the power transitions. Since there probably is already some high frequency noise coming out of the switching supplies on the setup it might also be interesting to use batteries to provide the heating power since we know those would provide very clean DC levels of power.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:28:31 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1852</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Alain Coetmeur says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1851</link>
			<description><![CDATA[#74@Gorgio good idea, but maybe I'm not expert enough for that. At most I can raise ideas, and some quote if I'm serious. Note that triggering is one domain of research. the other that i support is the domain of non stationary signal analysis : I feel (because I'be been studying that in eng school), that we could learn many thing by analysing transient, and periodic response of the reactor... detecting non-linéarities , elimination some questionable bias...]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Alain Coetmeur</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:07:53 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1851</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1850</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@MFMP: public live data stream for the US cells stopped at 15:00 UTC.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:03:22 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1850</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Giorgio says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1849</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Hi Robert, we met in Rome ("Coherence 2012" congress). I am a friend of Francesco Celani. I work at University of Palermo (Italy), I think that the triggering of the reaction using impulses is a very important subject. Giorgio]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Giorgio</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2013 14:36:44 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1849</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1848</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I don't know about anyone else, but I think the wire in cell 1.0 is loaded now! Phew... time for some real experiments.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2013 14:13:46 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1848</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1847</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Alain & Giorgio It is about time we launch a mini project in the Collaborate section for development of triggering methods for these type of nice stable cells like we have currently.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2013 14:00:06 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1847</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1846</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Andreas Van Rooijen Thank you for the tip off. In fact we are in contact with a broad spectrum of scientists in this field who are offering guidance and even equipment from time to time. Some are willing to be open, such as Celani and Dr. Edmond Storms, some have offerred their experience but we have yet to have the chance to engage them and yet others have asked to remain off the record in their contribution in the same way that some of our donors have requested to be anonymous. It is great if they are able to be open as it sits well with the MFMP ethos and by being open things move so much faster, with more credibility. Having said that we are not going to forget them in the historical record, all that add value shall be recognised in due course.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:57:02 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1846</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Andreas Van Rooijen says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1845</link>
			<description><![CDATA[A message for the European team, especially Mathieu. I spoke to Prof Biberian yesterday as he was giving a lecture on the topic of cold fusion in Eindhoven. He told me that he has a set up for liquid calorimetry. And that he knows Mathieu and the project. Why don't you team up with him and use his calorimetry device, this will improve the accuracy of the measurements!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Andreas Van Rooijen</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2013 10:21:47 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1845</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Giorgio says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1844</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Hi, The idea of using pulses to stimulate the reaction is a very good one, but I strongly suggest the use of very narrow (few nanosecond) high power (hundreds of watts) pulses. No more than few kilopulses per second. For this purpose you can use very cheap avalanche transistors (2N4401, 2N5551, 2N5192, ZTX415) and 2nF 1kV capacitor charged by > 200K resistor. It's important to keep low the inductance of discharge path. http://www.diodes.com/_files/products_appnote_pdfs/zetex/an8.pdf Giorgio]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Giorgio</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 22 Jan 2013 09:49:31 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1844</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ged says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1842</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Oh hm, I am seeing a big rise in P_xs on both cells. 2W for 1.1 and 3W for 1.0, using 4 hour view and 5 minute averaging. Puts both well outside the 95% confidence interval.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ged</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jan 2013 22:44:15 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1842</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1841</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Excellent reporting in the log file! It's great to be able to see something odd on the data and then check the log file and get an update on the physical environment. When I look at the data for the last 12 hours for the Mica cell I see that t-glassout has bump up at the same time that t-well and t-mica seem to have a bump down. Very odd. Any ideas why?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jan 2013 21:47:43 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1841</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ryan Hunt says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1838</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The T_Ambient is dropping because it is -20F (-29C) outside on our Research Campus. The small drop in room temp has caused the input voltage to drop by a few millivolts.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ryan Hunt</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jan 2013 16:44:27 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1838</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1835</link>
			<description><![CDATA[On US Cell 1.1, I think there might be at least partially an inverse relationship between P_Xs (or actually, P_Out) and T_Ambient. This seems to be quite visible since the start of the marked decrease in ambient temperature at 2013-01-20, 0:00 UTC. P_Xs and T_Ambient (mirrored vertically): http://i.imgur.com/miP8Epl.png Also watch out for a possible similar relationship between P_Xs and Pressure (mirrored vertically below): http://i.imgur.com/vzNidS8.png]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jan 2013 15:30:04 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1835</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1834</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ron B: as a sidenote, for such a long timeframe I would suggest using a 15 minutes average (rather than 5 minutes), which avoids wasting bandwidth by downloading data that can't be displayed due to lack of graph resolution.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jan 2013 13:19:02 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1834</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>123star says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1832</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@David #54 + others I propose another test about the IR transparency/wi re temperature dependence. Load the cell with two wires of the same kind. Do a calibration run putting all the power on one wire. Then do a second calibration run and split the power 50% 50%. In the latter case the radiating area is double, so the temperature of the wires is lower, but the input power is the same. Now see if the calibration curves match. My guess is that they won't. In light of the results presented in "Investigation of anomalous heat production in Ni-H systems" (http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/CerronZebainvestigat.pdf ) this would invalidate your method of calculating the excess heat.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>123star</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jan 2013 09:41:50 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1832</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>David Roberson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1831</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The large transient stepping will show any excess power clearly. To do this, Start with the cell after it has just cooled off from the calibration run. Ensure that the outer glass temperature is very near to ambient. In one motion or setting drive the Celani wire with the maximum level that you used for the calibration run. No power should be applied at this time to the other wire. Allow the 1.5 hours of steady power to stabilize the temperature. Immediately apply full power to the other wire while maintaining the full power drive to the Celani wire. Use care to keep air currents minimized and the pressure as constant as possible. Again give it 1.5 hours of steady drive. Ensure that the time between steps does not get more than 8 seconds or whatever is typical. Please no large time holes. Keep your excellent records and we should be there. (Third Part) Thanks guys!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>David Roberson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jan 2013 04:23:14 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1831</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>David Roberson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1829</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I have been considering the best calibration sequence that I can suggest to optimize the performance of my simulation program. There is one factor that gives me concern and that is the variation in IR radiation from the test wires. The earlier test you conducted where the power was shifted between the active and inactive wires revealed a different set of temperature readings depending upon which wire is activated. Fortunately the variation is not too great, but it will lead to minor calculation errors. I suggest that you first apply power to the Celani wire with three steps plus the 0 level. Attempt to choose levels that give roughly equal temperature steps. The last level is at the highest power you will use for this wire. Set the power in one motion and leave it near the desired level without making adjustments for fine tuning. The exact set point is not required. (First Part)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>David Roberson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jan 2013 03:55:54 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1829</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Rats says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1828</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Hi Robert Any updates on the large European company interested in what you guys are doing?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Rats</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jan 2013 01:57:24 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1828</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>AlanG says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1825</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Mathieu posted some SEM images of the Celani wire coating in a previous blog (11 Nov.) One seemed to show the layers separating from each other and from the core. Do we know the resistance of the coating itself. A careful measurement with fine probe tips would be interesting. I think there was a small piece of each wire left after building the cells.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>AlanG</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 Jan 2013 00:10:55 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1825</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1822</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@#48 Pierre Sure looks interesting doesn't it? The dropping of resistance is one thing but the fact that it bottoms out and reverses is something that is fascinating me.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 20 Jan 2013 22:25:50 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1822</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1817</link>
			<description><![CDATA[David, The fact that the resistance on the active wire continues to drop is a very curious phenomenon. It will be very interesting and possibly provide useful information to understand that effect over time. The sudden drop in inactive wire resistance yesterday afternoon is also very curious. It seems that it's trying to recover even now.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 20 Jan 2013 18:41:19 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1817</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1816</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@David We plan to run this dual cell test for a number of weeks if possible. Please suggest the kind of experiments you would like to explore - you have the floor...]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 20 Jan 2013 17:58:32 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1816</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>David Roberson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1815</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Guys, I still find myself unable to observe excess power with any of the calibration techniques that I have tried. I assume that I have done something wrong since you have great confidence that excess power is being generated, but it is reason to be cautious. Some among your group of followers enjoy keeping everything in a constant steady state as has been the case for a couple of days. In my estimate, this is likely a mistake. We are then at the mercy of previous calibrations that may well be in error. Had excess power been observed in abundance, the steady state observation would have been ideal, but under the conditions at hand, I think there is reason to believe that the experiment is not performing as expected. Before you abandon the tests, I hope that we can agree upon a time domain test process that my model can verify to a high degree of accuracy as being positive or negative. The tool exists now and should be utilized.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>David Roberson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 20 Jan 2013 17:12:15 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1815</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Rats says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1810</link>
			<description><![CDATA[P_xs has dropped off almost completely now]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Rats</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 20 Jan 2013 02:58:48 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1810</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1808</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ron B: the drop wasn't at the active wire. I guess it's an effect of a manual input power increase at the heater wire.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 20 Jan 2013 00:13:16 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1808</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1807</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Big resistance drop on the Macor cell. Current shot up too.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 20 Jan 2013 00:10:03 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1807</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Rats says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1805</link>
			<description><![CDATA[This is interesting stuff. However I am still not 100% confident of the measurement methods used. Now that you are seeing something that resembles excess energy, what are the next steps to confirm this beyond any doubt. Mass calorimetry?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Rats</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jan 2013 21:18:29 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1805</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Tommy Svensson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1804</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Maybe it's about time to try something else in parallel like the Zeolite experiment suggested in the Discussion/Inde x/Suggestions/P age 2 - "Suggestions - Use zeolites" entry. Supposed to have worked 10 times out of 10. BR Tommy S.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Tommy Svensson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jan 2013 19:44:24 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1804</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1803</link>
			<description><![CDATA[It just punched up over 3.8W in the higher pressure environment]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jan 2013 17:41:31 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1803</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1800</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ecco Cell 1.0 PXs is at the same level now as it was 24 hours ago but the pressure is now significantly higher and closer to mean calibration pressure. @Ron B We have considered magnetic flux but I am not sure we have that level of control on the PSU - would be nice to try that mini experiment though.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jan 2013 05:40:18 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1800</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1796</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Just for brainstorming, I noticed that there have been interesting downward variations in active wire resistance values, especially for the 1.0 cell. This might be an aspect worth to experiment with, especially since hydrogen loading in metals is reported to substantially improve with heat and pressure together. It might seem that this contradicts my suggestion to keep pressure levels to calibrated values, but what I'm actually saying is that one could take advantage of possible loading improvements of high pressure runs to improve those at calibrated levels.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2013 22:15:36 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1796</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1795</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Following the pressure increase, it looks like p_out calculations for cell 1.0 went back to initial values, while on cell 1.1 they have been mostly unaffected although they don't seem to be that much higher than starting values. Cell 1.1 http://i.imgur.com/uZbNW.png http://i.imgur.com/uZbNW.png Cell 1.0 http://i.imgur.com/xjEFl.png http://i.imgur.com/xjEFl.png @MFMP: assuming a LENR effect as reported by Celani and Mastromatteo is indeed happening, I propose again to explore higher temperature ranges through the heater wire to check out if output heat increases more than what the input power would normally suggest (positive feedback with temperature effect).]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2013 21:53:52 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1795</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Pekka Janhunen says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1793</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Piantelli's patent (EP23682528B1) seems to teach [0060] that argon is a LENR poison.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Pekka Janhunen</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2013 20:56:22 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1793</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1790</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ryan Maybe some spike power on the active say 10s pulse of 10W extra/less and see what that does.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2013 20:13:25 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1790</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1789</link>
			<description><![CDATA[No problem, I think it is necessary in order to verify if the slow increase in calculated excess heat we've seen over the past day is real or mainly an artifact of the hydrogen pressure decreasing. EDIT: or you could also try the opposite in the process: try decreasing pressure to like 0.5 bar to see how much of an effect this has on P-out calculations. Just make sure you don't drop it too much or you'll burn out your wires and coat the glass tubes.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2013 19:39:47 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1789</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ryan Hunt says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1788</link>
			<description><![CDATA[All in favor of re-upping the H2 pressure to the average level from the calibration runs at peak power? It'd help us understand if the pressure is the leading driver here.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ryan Hunt</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2013 19:36:29 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1788</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Dieter Seeliger says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1787</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Alan, I studied the Widom Larsen Theory, but unfortunately I`m not a theoretical physicist and do not understand every step of their complex theory. Could you explain my the creation of cold neutrons which, regarding to their theory, are needed for the transmutation of elements found to be assoziated with the LENR reaction? BR Dieter BTW: Also every link for further studies of this topic will be highly appreciated !!!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Dieter Seeliger</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2013 19:19:57 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1787</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ryan Hunt says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1784</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Thanks, Ecco. I had captured graphs just about like that earlier today.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ryan Hunt</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2013 18:15:23 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1784</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>David Roberson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1782</link>
			<description><![CDATA[So far I have not been able to confirm any excess power. I have tried hard, but I now calculate -.7 watts average for cell 1.0. I am confident that the difference between my calculations and yours is a matter of calibration which should be capable of resolution. I could suggest a test procedure that I am convinced could be used to verify excess power, but I hate to slow down your progress. We are all waiting on edge for the stainless steel version of the cell and its results. Congratulations to your team for a super effort.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>David Roberson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2013 18:03:16 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1782</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1780</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Bob, Short notice? Were there guns involved? :eek: The last log entry 2013-01-15-16:0 0CET	Increase power to 58.6 W	Nicolas Chauvin]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2013 16:46:23 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1780</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1778</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@All The EU cell had to be taken off line at short notice to be taken to a big european consortium for preliminary discussion about it. If they are not time wasters, we will ask them to sign an MFMP Full Disclosure Agreement (FDA) as soon as possible. So it has not been on line for a few days. Normal programming will resume shortly. Currently we are trying to track down Nicholas as we have not heard from him (except an unqualified request to urgently order more glass tubes) since he left for the meeting. @Mitch Trachtenberg Thanks for your cheer leading and suggestion. We are told that these experiments need some current flux and minimum temperatures to be able to produce the effect. The experiments you talk of will be much more likely to succeed in the insulated steel cells - we are excited by our research so far and anxious to get onto this stage. But we had to see if there was something in the wires nature first and we are increasingly positive about what we are seeing. @Arnaud Please refer to a previous blog post below where we discuss the potential chemical in the cell. http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/follow/follow-2/152-can-it-be-chemical The wire is only 95cm in these cells, so there is less active material. So basically if we produce 2.5Wh over our upper confidence interval we have exceeded chemical - that occurred a long time ago. This was the case for the EU run also. However, we reserve final judgement until we get a chance to look at elemental analysis of the before and after and how the wires look under SEM. @Ecco Some of this effect will be mitigated by the steel cell only having to seal at one end - we hope for lower leakage rates. @Dieter Seeliger When we found our sourced oxided wire appeared to show some excess heat in the EU calibration runs, Celani asked us to test the wire for magnetism afterwards and we found that the ends held in the screws were magnetic. He said that was good as the source wire seams to need to have this property for the processed wire to be good. I think you are on the right track.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2013 14:25:34 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1778</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1777</link>
			<description><![CDATA[A non-LENR explanation of why power_out appears to increase when power_in is constant might be that static reactor conditions somehow cause heat to build up around it. Is there proper ventilation around the reactor assembly?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2013 12:54:28 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1777</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Dieter Seeliger says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1776</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I`ve the same problem. Looks like the EU cell data stream is down....]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Dieter Seeliger</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2013 11:39:11 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1776</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1775</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I can't seem to access the EU data. Is anyone else having that problem? The date shows up as 1970 and no data.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2013 11:00:35 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1775</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1772</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Mitch, it's a good idea. I have a feeling there will be some more opportunities to "pull the plug" very soon! Nice write-up team and it tracks the events of last night as I saw them in the data.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2013 01:11:50 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1772</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>nixter says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1771</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Great to see the interesting results! This project demonstrates the difficulty of reproducing LENR experiments. This team has resources and experienced personnel, and even so, obtaining solid results has been difficult. Unfunded solo experimenters claiming success on the internet, like Chan are starting to look like pie in the sky dreamers and exaggerators to say the least!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>nixter</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2013 00:49:17 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1771</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Arnaud says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1769</link>
			<description><![CDATA[To remove any discussion about a chemical reaction, the effect must be kept ON with excess heat for a very long time. I mean weeks, because with 2 or 3 watts, the energy released isn't much after a few days. For 3 days @3W, we have only 778kJ, still in the reach of a chemical reaction inside. But on the other hand, the excess heat was irregular which is a good sign. Despite, I had said a few days ago, the 2L wire started to load H2 very slowly and now produce maybe an excess heat. Good luck for the next step with the SS tube reactor.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Arnaud</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jan 2013 23:00:25 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1769</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Mitch Trachtenberg says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1768</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Lovely. What would be even lovelier would be if, the next time you saw an apparent hour-long temperature increase corresponding to an input power drop, if you were to drop input power to zero. As an uninformed but always hopeful outsider, I note that the biggest problem for credibility traction in MY mind is always the simple fact that there's power being input. Unplug the power and, logically or not, any evidence of the existence of excess power will be much more aesthetically satisfying. But, regardless, bravo, boys, bravo!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Mitch Trachtenberg</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jan 2013 22:57:26 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-1768</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
