<?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 11:05:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/component/jcomments/feed/com_content/205" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>Eric Walker says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2180</link>
			<description><![CDATA[To follow up on my previous comment -- upon further reflection, I don't think the problem of messing up the calibration constant by opening up and replacing the active wire is specific to Celani's setup. This would happen in almost any setup. Perhaps part of the difficulties could be addressed by having an identical cell, run in a parallel circuit with the cell with the Celani wire, but with Pt instead. Just brainstorming. This is a hard problem.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Eric Walker</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 11 Feb 2013 08:03:01 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2180</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Rats says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2113</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I've been thinking a bit about the positive P_xs the cells are showing. P_xs is derived from some calculations based on calibration baselines, right? So when the maths shows the output power to be greater than what was established during the calibration then we show a positive P_xs. However taking a closer look at the data available it appears T_glassout is fairly stable for the duration of the experiment. If the Celani cell is producing excess heat should we not see a higher delta for T_glassout?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Rats</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 06 Feb 2013 21:08:20 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2113</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>David Roberson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2097</link>
			<description><![CDATA[It has been a long while since I ran the data from cell 1.1 through my program so I was not sure what to expect for its determination of the excess power. I prefer to work with transitions of power between levels since that is what it was designed to perform. It has been a long time since any transitions have been available, but the input from Ascoli got my attention. I ran a dummy transient and let the program calculate the best match for the power input as if it were a calibration. I used the latest data for the last 12 hours at 30 second intervals. I get a matched power of 105.6 watts with peaks reaching the input that should be available of 106.4 watts. I used the calibration values obtained during the special run for this experiment. I would consider this a null excess power event. I have been using the outer glass - ambient for the temperature delta. This does not support excess power generation.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>David Roberson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2013 22:55:18 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2097</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2089</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Alan, Very good question. In the Extra cell there's no pressure sensor but if we assume the pressure is dropping there too, and there's no active wire in it then the graph of it's temperature rising over the last 5 days might be a clue. Looks like you're adding just enough H to keep the pressure constant, excellent plan!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2013 21:17:12 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2089</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>AlanG says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2088</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Where is the hydrogen going? http://magicsound.us/MFMP/Ambient_vs_Cell_Pressure.jpg]]></description>
			<dc:creator>AlanG</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2013 19:05:31 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2088</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ascoli65 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2087</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@ HUG Team The image below provides an update of the power imbalance at cell 1.1 in the period from January 25 to February 5, corrected on the base of the gas density inside the cell. As you can see, the corrected imbalance remains close to zero. It is to be noted that the formula and the parameters used for the correction were derived from the calibration cycles performed between 4 and 8 January, when the molecular density decreased from 3.1 to 2.7 mbar/K. The present much lower value of density, about 2 mbar/K, may affect this correction. It would be useful to replay, at the end of this period run at constant power, a few calibration cycles, varying each time the initial (cold) pressure from 0.5 to 2.0 bar (or vice versa), with 0.5 bar steps (4 cycles in total). In this way, one could derive a more precise correction formula to be applied to the results obtained until now. Image: http://i.imgur.com/UAHtfNH.jpg]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ascoli65</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2013 18:54:06 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2087</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2083</link>
			<description><![CDATA[What we need is to remove these debates about gas and the effect of the environment... GET READY! EeeeeyYiYi.. lol Go slowly!!! Over hours if possible.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2013 18:09:29 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2083</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2082</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@All Are we considering that as the internal cell temp goes up, the gas pressure increases over 1 atm, then gas leaks... this lowers the density of the gas and so potentially its ability to conduct power away from the wire to the glass - but the wire is close to the Macor... What we need is to remove these debates about gas and the effect of the environment... GET READY!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2013 18:05:34 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2082</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Malachi Heder says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2081</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@ Ecco First we charge a length of pipe with hydrogen, then we use a series of needle valves and quarter-turn plug valves, to control the flow into the reactors. We can usually get a small steps of 0.01 bar or so with this method. @ 123star As to how many sensors have the aluminum patch, there is only one. It is on cell 1.1 as the T_GlassOut sensor. We are also using a white thermal paste between the aluminum and glass. The rest of the exterior glass sensors are fixed with Kapton tape.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Malachi Heder</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2013 18:00:01 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2081</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>123star says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2080</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Hi all, I propose yet another (simple) test to check if IR absorption matters. I know that all current temperature probes on the glass surface are attached to an aluminum patch (correct?). Aluminum is a good reflector so IR absorption is reduced greatly. I propose to attach another temperature probe on the glass with ugly, BLACK, electrical tape (so to say) which is presumably opaque at near IR and see if: -- The absolute reading of the "black tape probe" is higher by a certain offset (I suspect so) -- The reading of the "black tape probe" follows the T_Macor and internal temperatures, unlike what happens now (as shown by Ecco). This effect, if present, should be imputable to IR absorption characteristics .]]></description>
			<dc:creator>123star</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2013 17:55:59 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2080</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2079</link>
			<description><![CDATA[When increasing pressure back to 1.4 bar, is it possible to do it slowly, in a controlled way?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2013 17:42:50 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2079</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Malachi Heder says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2077</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@ David Roberson Just trying to understand a bit more about your prediction curves. Would the calibration factors remain the same with or without excess heat? As of now, we are not quite sure whether there is an exact trigger temp/power/curr ent. There could be excess heat at all power levels that could throw off your predicted equilibrium, correct? If we performed another calibration as before and we see a different set of factors, would they say that we are not producing excess heat or could it say that we are producing excess heat? Likewise, if we see the same factors (within tolerance), would that mean that we are not seeing excess heat or would it mean that we are seeing excess heat?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Malachi Heder</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2013 16:46:59 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2077</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2074</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I would *really* like to cool them off and reset the pressure to 1 bar. However, comparing internal and Glass_Out temperatures for both cells 1.0 and 1.1 might be a more effective reality check. Cell 1.0 Mica Temperature (used for P_xs calculations) http://i.imgur.com/GW3XlJH.png Glass_Out temperature http://i.imgur.com/sV4Qimq.png Cell 1.1 T_Macor temperature (used for P_xs calculations) http://i.imgur.com/nVmyg1R.png T_G1 and T_G2 (auxiliary external glass temperature - upper and middle glass tube sections) http://i.imgur.com/avvdfVb.png I fear that some are getting too much enthusiastic, too early.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2013 14:48:32 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2074</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Dieter Seeliger says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2072</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ryan, did you noticed my comment #80 at the post: "Much Lower Levels [UPDATE#1 - back to higher Pxs]" ? BR Dieter]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Dieter Seeliger</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2013 11:27:43 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2072</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2071</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ron B The US cells are playing very nice at the moment. Will be interesting to see if we have to lower the power and load the wire again after a while and start another cycle. The wires, from the last 2 EU runs are planned to be analysed with SEM. We are dependent on the donation of university facility time and that is a challenge to secure, if anyone can provide another option before we get access to the previous resource we used, that would be awesome. Mathieu is an SEM god, but he needs the tool to do the job also. @Rats By the end of today we hope we will post a mega blog that I think is going to surprise you all. It will address most of the challenges and problems we have seen to date. What we have done so far has given us much confidence that Celani really has something and this set of tests will be run during our kickstarter and we hope will produce the conclusive evidence that the New Fire is not only possible, but really on its way to us. These tests are going to be expensive for us, so we hope that when the Kickstarter is running, everyone can rally together and spread the word to the world to help let us light the New Fire together.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2013 09:57:41 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2071</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2070</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The Euro Cell shows about 8 and a half volts on the red channel (which isn't supposed to be connected to anything). Is this the mysterious EMF we've heard about? ;) If both US cells continue at the same rate, it looks like they might reach the 7W mark by this time tomorrow.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2013 03:38:56 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2070</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2069</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Bob, any idea what's happening with the Celani wire that was removed from the Euro cell? Will they be taking it out for SEM analysis? That wire appears to have been creating excess power, it would be great to get a close look at it now.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 05 Feb 2013 02:08:32 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2069</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2067</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Rats If we produce 3W for an hour we pass chemical. We are as fascinated as everyone else as to what is going on - both cells are in the same environment and are doing different things - but there been a good run up of late.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2013 22:59:29 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2067</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Rats says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2066</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Guys, it is very interesting to see what's happening with cells 1.0 and 1.1. The fact that over a 12 hour period P_xs has been steadily rising is particularly intriguing. What can we make of all this? How long before we can confidently say we're seeing excess energy from something other than chemical?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Rats</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2013 21:22:09 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2066</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2065</link>
			<description><![CDATA[If you look at Cell 1.1 for the last 12 hours at 5 min res, you see that the peaks getting near 6 are starting to look like leaping flames!! NewFire]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2013 13:26:04 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2065</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2063</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Cell 1.1 punching over 5.47W PXs and Cell 1.0 punching over 4W on 15 min average today, pressure stuck around 1 bar now. This is now getting into the range of the EU cells performance in nominal PXs (not %age as input power is higher). Let's let these babies run for a good while yet.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 2013 09:43:52 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2063</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2059</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Bob, I see what looks to be the effect of a PWM (pulse width modulation) in the data stream for power inputs. Can you discuss how the supply controls the power level on the active wire?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 03 Feb 2013 17:20:39 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2059</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2055</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The test at < 1 bar would only be aimed to test if P_xs actually increases with a lower pressure. On the long term it would indeed make the possible contamination problem worse. I don't foresee much coming from an extension of the current steady state test by 2-4 more weeks. To me, it seems that most of the increase can be accounted by the decrease in pressure and T_ambient variations. I tried reconstructing a P_Xs graph only using normalized Pressure and T_Ambient values and it's close enough to actual P_Xs values. Even though the model I used for this is dead simple, it does not inspire me much confidence that the calculated excess heat is real, at least to the calculated extent: http://i.imgur.com/mqgnpJZ.png http://i.imgur.com/mqgnpJZ.png Maybe waiting some more time might shed some light on this, but to be frank I'm rather skeptical. I expect the calculated P_Xs to increase some more as Pressure stabilizes.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 03 Feb 2013 16:45:42 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2055</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2054</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ecco We are aware of this and have discussed it before, the problem is even bigger challenge at 0.5 bar. Hydrogen is a much smaller molecule than most of the gasses in air however, which is something to think about. Also, even if all the hydrogen oxidises and the wire is oxidised, a few hours at 3W should cover the potential PXs this would result in... that is why it is good to run this experiment as it is for some time. Importantly, the new protocol addresses these issues and a host of other ones.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 03 Feb 2013 16:06:06 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2054</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2051</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I would propose to either: - Reduce pressure to 0.75 or 0.5 bar. If there's is a correlation with internal pressure, P_Xs should increase. However if this happens, it would show that the excess, and in particular the recent slow rise to 3-5-4W, is most likely an artifact. - Increase pressure to 6-8 bar. If pressure isn't expected to have noticeable effects on P_Xs, then P_Xs shouldn't decrease when rising pressure. By the way, this is a test that I hoped to see for some time. Wire loading is supposed to improve with high pressure and heat. After some time at high heat and pressure, bring back pressure to standard values (~1 bar when unpowered). If the experiment is successful, P_Xs should show higher values at lower pressures due to improved loading.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 03 Feb 2013 14:21:54 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2051</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2050</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Punching over 4W on 1.1 and over 3.1W on 1.0 cells. How about we leave this running for some time more so that we have lots of lovely data to dig into? Maybe after a really long run (say another 2-4 weeks) - we can replace the active wire with some plain oxidised Constantan and see if we ever see the "Pxs" at these levels with exact same set-up over a long run. B]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 03 Feb 2013 14:01:28 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2050</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2049</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Charlie Tapp Celani was seeing 20+ Watts over 48. We would like to see over 10% excess, which there was some indication we did in the first EU run. This is the kind of target a well known fusion project spanning half a century and costing many 10s billions wants to see. However, we need an apparatus and protocol that is easy to follow and consistently produces this target in independent live testing, so that public and scientific confidence is total in the finding. We are cautiously optimistic that the new protocol will get us to that goal.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 03 Feb 2013 08:29:13 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2049</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>charlie tapp says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2048</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Also I was working on a lift station control panel for a sewage plant, not the first one, and I have noticed that anything around methane gas and having any kind of electrical current on it turns very black is this loading of gas in any way anyone know?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>charlie tapp</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 03 Feb 2013 00:24:20 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2048</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>charlie tapp says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2047</link>
			<description><![CDATA[How much exess power are we expecting to actually see in this expirement because I think my hopes might be set to high, I can't see saying 3 watts as incontiversial. I thought this thing would show somewhere in the neiborehood of like ten.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>charlie tapp</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 03 Feb 2013 00:20:11 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2047</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Frasp says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2046</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I like my posts. They let the little people (like me) understand :P Seriously though, best of luck!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Frasp</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2013 19:49:19 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2046</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2045</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Frasp Please read my post #15. We are preparing for a raft of differential experiments on both sides of the pond using a new protocol to run along side the current 2 US cells and the US steel cell. The EU cell is helping us understand the likely hood of the differential experiments working and then it will be used to explore the new protocol whilst the rest of the hardware is being manufactured. We are hoping that these experiments will enable us to show we have an incontrovertibl e experiment suitable for multiple independent replication to be funded by a Kickstarter campaign we hope everyone can help us promote.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2013 19:26:43 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2045</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Frasp says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2044</link>
			<description><![CDATA[OK, so I'm not getting something again... The EU cell has been showing excess heat for a very long time. The excess heat is also, as I understand it, based on a conservative value (P_Out Low). Wouldn't this make it a done deal, or is the EU cell data just on here for fun?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Frasp</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2013 19:01:18 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2044</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ged says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2043</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ron B, Hm, that is an interesting observation. 3 W... seems to be a trend here between the devices.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ged</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2013 16:05:59 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2043</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2040</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Curious that the EU cell, after removing the Celani wire, has had the excess power reduced by over 3 watts. This seems like a clever idea to show the contribution of the Celani wire. Is that the point of the test?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2013 09:41:19 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2040</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>david jones says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2039</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Sorry - my mistake - you are heating the air. I should have looked at your design first.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>david jones</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2013 21:56:28 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2039</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2037</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ecco The EU cell is running through a few random tests before being shipped back to southern France to be reconditioned for a brand new protocol. This future well documented experiment will be a pre-cursor to a differential set of experiments we will be conducting on both sides of the pond. We are preparing a mega blog to explain all, but it is game on today as we have just been told that Celani will supply all the necessary wires in order to run this experiment. Celani is so impressed by the engagement of the community here and this has helped to both inspire this new protocol and his willingness to see we have the active material to explore it. It is going to be costly to do, but we are very excited about this and we think everyone else will be too! We hope that it will be the perfect accompaniment to our Kickstarter, during which we hope we will show, through this set of experiments and others, that we can deliver the necessary lab rat and gain the finance to do it also. Thanks again to all those that have donated or otherwise contributed.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2013 19:56:18 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2037</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>david jones says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2036</link>
			<description><![CDATA[One improvement to your design is to incorporate a water radiator at the bottom. Stabilise the water flow at a temperature above the maximum room temperature. Correctly designed this will keep the air flow at a constant temperature.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>david jones</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2013 19:24:30 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2036</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2034</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@MFMP: could we get some information on what is going on with the EU cell? One thing I don't get for example is the P_Xs calculation. Right now, as of writing, Power (Blue) is 58.8W. Power (Red) is 0W. P_Out (Low) 65.5W. How come P_Xs (Low) is -1.1W? Can these figures be trusted?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2013 17:44:32 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2034</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Gong Cunkui says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2026</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Great work! I plan to replicate the celani experiment also recently. I've read your blogs and realized you did a really excellent job. Here are some questions when I build the setup. How do you seal the inlet gas tube, Twell tube with flange to keep the vacuum? Did you weld the tubes and the flange together or use glue?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Gong Cunkui</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 01 Feb 2013 01:06:17 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2026</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Bruce Ikelheimer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2024</link>
			<description><![CDATA[It looks like the AFC is sitting directly on the floor...is that correct? Maybe some insulation there to avoid the probably unknown thermal sink of the flooring wouldn't hurt.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Bruce Ikelheimer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jan 2013 21:51:52 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2024</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>clovis ray says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2022</link>
			<description><![CDATA[hi, guys . That is a very fine pieace of work, i am impressed, you guys are doing a fantistic job. with this fine pieace of equipent you guys will find the awnsers, you seek. thanks for letting us tag alone, on this most exciting experement,]]></description>
			<dc:creator>clovis ray</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jan 2013 12:22:36 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2022</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>David Roberson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2020</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ryan, I would expend a lot of energy and time ensuring that the AFC works satisfactory. You would immediately have proof of measured excess power if the AFC is able to collect and then display power that closely matches the calibration levels. Take your time and do your magic. We are an impatient bunch of folks, but I am willing to wait for accurate results. I want to see excess power and to be confident that it is consistent and real. Keep up with the great work.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>David Roberson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 30 Jan 2013 22:05:40 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2020</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Dieter Seeliger says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2008</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I`m very curios what this AFC can do at higher temperatures. Could the longer time constant be a problem ? BR Dieter]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Dieter Seeliger</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 30 Jan 2013 06:08:55 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2008</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>David Roberson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2004</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Great looking setup guys.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>David Roberson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jan 2013 23:29:58 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-2004</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
