<?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>Fri, 08 May 2026 15:21:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/component/jcomments/feed/com_content/324" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>Wade says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-29393</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I blog frequently and I seriously thank you for your information. This great article has really peaked my interest. I'm going to book mark your site and krep checking ffor new information about once a week. I subscribed to your Feed too. Here is my web blog ... escort mersin ilan: http://clapicos.free.fr/modules.php?name=Your_Account&op=userinfo&username=MollieMulk]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Wade</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2025 10:07:24 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-29393</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Wade says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-29394</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I blog frequently and I seriously thank you for your information. This great article has really peaked my interest. I'm going to book mark your site and krep checking ffor new information about once a week. I subscribed to your Feed too. Here is my web blog ... escort mersin ilan: http://clapicos.free.fr/modules.php?name=Your_Account&op=userinfo&username=MollieMulk]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Wade</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2025 10:07:12 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-29394</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>ZacharyAlarl says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-25740</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Подскажите где найти лучшие рецепты со всего мира: от классических блюд, которые согревают душу, до современных кулинарных шедевров, которые впечатляют даже самых взыскательных гурманов - https://hexagon.vn/2023/06/22/harnessing-the-power-of-social-media-for-business-growth - домашние рецепты]]></description>
			<dc:creator>ZacharyAlarl</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2025 06:58:25 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-25740</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>SamuelTucky says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-25534</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Кракен сайт: Безопасный доступ к ресурсам | магазин даркнет тор кракен даркнет маркетплейс - https://krakendark.at/ При желании купить наркотики важно знать, что существует множество вариантов, но лучше выбрать товар от проверенных поставщиков, чтобы не разочароваться в результате. Выбор товара в наркошоп КРАКЕН несложен, ведь мы предлагаем только качественную продукцию, проверенную на всех этапах. Покупая у нас, вы можете быть уверены, что получите именно то, что ожидаете. Наши эксперты всегда готовы помочь вам сделать правильный выбор, исходя из ваших предпочтений и потребностей. Ознакомьтесь с рекомендациями и выберите лучший товар на наркошоп Кракен. тор сайты с товарами - https://kdmp1.cc/ КРАКЕН интернет-рынок мессенджер Telegram]]></description>
			<dc:creator>SamuelTucky</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2025 23:26:50 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-25534</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Rickyrix says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-22848</link>
			<description><![CDATA[If you're a fan of Sherlock Holmes-style adventures, this Victorian-theme d casino slot will blow you away. Designed with atmospheric visuals and immersive audio, this slot game feels like a mystery novel come to life. Expect high-quality design, exciting bonus features, and symbols straight out of a 19th-century London crime story. Click here to play this Victorian-theme d casino slot and dive into the mystery: https://www.paineletiqueta.com.br/best-online-casinos-2025-6-000-real-money-sites-76/ Solve the mystery, spin the reels, and unlock big rewards in this standout casino slot.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Rickyrix</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 15 Apr 2025 21:13:12 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-22848</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Pearline04 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-8916</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I think your website needs some fresh articles. Writing manually takes a lot of time, but there is tool for this time consuming task, search for: ssundee advices unlimited content for your blog]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Pearline04</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 29 Oct 2017 10:40:00 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-8916</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4256</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I would be interested to point an IR camera on the wire. Are there hot spots? Would it look like the SPAWAR IR video?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 04 Sep 2013 03:44:49 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4256</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4255</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Wire #2 in cell B is getting interesting. On the 2nd it was not just breathing it was panting (I have two dogs). Lots of flux but I think we are still at very low loading. http://i.imgur.com/5XXCuzO.jpg]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 03 Sep 2013 22:21:01 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4255</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4244</link>
			<description><![CDATA[What is Vac (mbar) and why does it peak every mid-night? The leak means two things hydrogen is leaking and oxygen is leaking in.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Sep 2013 14:50:00 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4244</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4243</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Edwin Pell? sorry, but, flux of what exactly? What do you mean that the cell is running out of flux? Anyway, I think there are more serious issues to solve first. For example I find very concerning that whenever Cell B appears to be increasing in temperature, Cell A does almost the exact opposite, and viceversa: http://i.imgur.com/rXZSPLu.png http://i.imgur.com/rXZSPLu.png http://i.imgur.com/1CfPMqN.png http://i.imgur.com/1CfPMqN.png To me this is hinting that cell location and exposure to external influences (random air currents, pockets of heated air, ambient temperature variations etc) are largely responsible for the apparent excess heat signal.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Sep 2013 14:33:40 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4243</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4242</link>
			<description><![CDATA[We need a breathing mode. load, unload, load, unload, etc... Right now we are focused on load, load, load, etc I think we have reached the end of that road.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Sep 2013 14:18:47 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4242</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4241</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Bob, there is not much flux left. It used to vary from .004 to .001 now it is more like .001 to 0. So, relative to this small number wire #2 is significant. http://i.imgur.com/yoVnumB.jpg http://i.imgur.com/IfHFUbd.jpg previous data http://i.imgur.com/AKrO5c1.jpg?1 This all makes sense except for the peak in excess heat at 12am on the 1st. Overall less flux means less excess heat. On the other hand the rise that is happening now is strange. Little flux but rising excess heat.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Sep 2013 14:00:30 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4241</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4240</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Robert Greenyer: I didn't notice that new data was coming in. Indeed, it appears that CuNi #2 is starting to load, with the 40W passive heating: http://i.imgur.com/4Isvk4k.png http://i.imgur.com/4Isvk4k.png Oscillating patterns for the previous power steps are most likely due to diurnal variations in ambient temperature.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Sep 2013 11:45:34 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4240</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4239</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@All Could people take a look at the last 3 days data. It would appear that following the last step of power and re-pressure on the main wire, the second wire is starting to load which appears to be endothermic pulling the cells temperatures closer together, but that might be because the higher pressure is stopping any potential excess heat process, but that after a period, the pressure drops to a lower level and the apparent excess returns. We are approaching the practical safe current in the main powered wire, but there is still some headroom, so there is more chance for passive loading of the second wire before actively powering it.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Sep 2013 11:25:47 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4239</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4238</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ecco With regard to variation in environmental talk back. It would be possible to swap the cell positions over and keep everything else the same.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Sep 2013 10:55:00 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4238</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ryan Hunt says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4236</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@All - Sorry for the lack of reporting and the interruption in the data flow. I was out all week for some much needed time away from everything except my family. The rest of my team was dealing with network problems from lightning and other troubleshooting . Monday is a national holiday in the USA. My team deserves the break, but we will reconvene on Tuesday and we'll see where everything is at and get it all fixed or communicated or whatever it is that is a higher priority. I would very much like to thank Ed Pell for his write up. I feel his contribution, along with so many of the other regular commentors here are a huge validation of the approach we are trying to take. Without that kind of interactive dialog and participation in the process, it simply would not be worth it to take the pains we do to try and publish our process live. To do the analysis and prepare the blog posts and engage in the wider discussion does require quite a bit of time. The whole effort is highly unorthodox and is, itself, an experiment. Is it worth it? It certainly has allowed us much criticism to grow from. @Frasp - I am overjoyed to understand how important following our work is to you. We'll try to make it worth your while.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ryan Hunt</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Sep 2013 04:14:22 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4236</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4234</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Is the experiment still running and just not updating to the web? Either way what next, what are the plans? Thanks. I like the idea of stepping down. You took one step down and got to fully loaded. Would two steps get us to over-loaded flux out and excess power?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Sep 2013 01:24:29 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4234</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4233</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Frasp, I am feeling uncertain about the social etiquette of "open science". I do not know if we think in terms of officals of MFMP and outside observers or what. But anyway as a person who tries to follow what is going on I wrote a report about this experiment which you can find a link to in my post down a few. It shows a graph of excess heat as a function of applied power. It shows a curve fit that is quadratic after the threshold. I hope you find it informative. I think what we are seeing is that few people like to write reports and given a chance to do some more engineering/sci ence/programmin g or write a report ....]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 01 Sep 2013 21:19:12 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4233</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4232</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Ecco, I like the comprise of using the connection at ambient and then closing and running hot. And returning to ambient as needed to re-equalize the two sides. The other thing that needs to be done is find the leak and fix it. It is huge one atm lost in 12 hours starting at 3 atm pressure. It should be visible with soapy water. I volunteer to come out and hunt for it.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 01 Sep 2013 21:09:11 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4232</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4229</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Edwin Pell: a couple more uses for the shared H2 connection are that: - It can guarantee that both cells have the exact same gas mix (this can be a problem if something other than H2 is used or if different gases are used in a given timeframe) - If when the shared connection is closed, over time one of the cells leaks more gas than the other (due to higher temperature, more severe leaks, etc), all needs to be done to solve this is cooling them off to ambient temperature, then open the connection for a while to equilibrate pressure again before restarting the experiment and no need to mess with pressurized gas bottles. This could be even automated with an electronically controlled valve. All in all however I agree too that the shared plumbing doesn't have (nor needs) to be kept open all the time while input power is applied.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 01 Sep 2013 19:39:32 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4229</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4226</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The H2 connection does not make sense to me. If both cells start with the same amount of H2 and the same pressure. Then at higher applied power the hot cell should have higher pressure than the less hot cell. By connecting them you make this impossible. It is no longer a differential experiment. It is an experiment when gas is moved from the hot cell to the cold cell. When the pressure in the hot cell is decreased and the pressure in the cold cell is increased relative to where they would be if they were separate. This confuses things greatly.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 01 Sep 2013 18:44:42 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4226</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>btbbass says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4225</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I completely agree with Ecco. What is needed now, is strong data (can we be 100% sure of data acquisition boards / setup ?), strong data and least but not last, strong data.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>btbbass</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 31 Aug 2013 23:25:31 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4225</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Ellefson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4224</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Ecco, this is a consideration that we should keep in mind, I agree. Edwin, would you mind editing that paper to include a title and a byline with all author names on it? It seems like a wonderfully helpful summation of what has been happening, and I would like to publish it further. We should be careful about attribution though; this is not a conclusion published by the MFMP, but rather a summation published by an active participant or set of participants in the MFMP, offered generously for the public benefit. Thanks again for your work!]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Ellefson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 31 Aug 2013 20:09:24 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4224</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Ellefson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4223</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Edwin, Fantastic work! I really appreciate the summary, because I have been so busy with other work that I've personally lost track of where things stand with this experiment. I find your presentation to be eminently helpful. Ecco, This is not a conclusive report, it is a summary of in-progress work, and it is very helpful for our combined efforts. There will always be critics speaking negatively of whatever we do; I would rather focus our efforts on our work than on theirs.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Ellefson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 31 Aug 2013 20:01:38 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4223</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4222</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Edwin Pell: I would have waited for more robust results before writing a report that is now going to be taken apart by most pseudoskeptics (mainly because they will treat this as an official MFMP data product) who don't understand the testing setup and the concept of "preliminary data". Now that it's getting circulated on relatively popular blogs, I guess it's too late. This is going to grab the attention of unwanted people.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 31 Aug 2013 16:57:20 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4222</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4220</link>
			<description><![CDATA[All, here is a report about some of the data from the current Celani wire experiment. pdf format https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B3Ui1N6AwE6ncHdidzN0bUU0WFE/edit?usp=sharing html format https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B3Ui1N6AwE6nUHJzeTdNMGoxRG8/edit?usp=sharing openOffice format https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B3Ui1N6AwE6nSGdRSVZNV2M3QTA/edit?usp=sharing]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 31 Aug 2013 04:52:03 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4220</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4218</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ryan Hunt: unrelated, but are there still problems with live data? Disregarding this week's downtime, recently it appears it regularly stops updating on late afternoon, US Central Time. Does that happen because you (inadvertently? ) turn off the lab's internet connection or some PC/machine at the end of the day?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 30 Aug 2013 20:00:31 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4218</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4217</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ecco Celani talked of "hot spots" of 800ºC, but in his ICCF18 paper he says that AHE effect increases up to wire temp of 700ºc after which self sintering destroys the active structures. It is not so much the high temperature but also setting up some instability in the system, be that thermal gradients, pressure fluctiations etc. etc. With stable, stable, there is no flux and that is when no excess is apparent. Too much temperature and low pressure, will give flux and may deload, too much pressure and H2 molecule velocity colliding with the wire surface may de-adsorb H or cause H recombination. The question is, is it due to a specific structure element morphology, boundary or material/medium boundary effect that if H transits, excess is seen? @Ed Pell Celani advises keeping under 1.75A]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 30 Aug 2013 19:59:45 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4217</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ryan Hunt says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4216</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Wire Type: CuNi1= 434 Layer CuNi2= 360 Layer]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ryan Hunt</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 30 Aug 2013 18:55:12 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4216</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4215</link>
			<description><![CDATA[How many layers does the Celani wire 1 in cell B have? Thanks.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 30 Aug 2013 17:56:05 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4215</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4214</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The wire is highly loaded. If you go too far the mechanical swelling may cause the outer layer of "good stuff" to fall off. Do you see any fragments at the bottom of the tube now? Little black specks.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 30 Aug 2013 16:12:32 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4214</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4210</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Robert Greenyer: I wasn't expecting more accurate excess power figures, but knowing that there are indications that the higher the temperature, the higher the excess, I did expect to also read the approximate operating temperature at which the excess power range was measured. For example Celani might be routinely using 350-400°C, but the wires might be able to reach, say, 550-600°C (under hydrogen) without getting damaged, potentially generating more excess heat than he ever measured under lower temperatures.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 30 Aug 2013 12:59:50 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4210</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4209</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ecco This is the approximate range claimed per gram by Celani for this range of wires/manufactu ring procedure. We are part of the process of discovering the right conditions. There is no guarantee we have active wires. Those that are active, fall in this range 5-50W/g range and so if we had only 1 active wire at bottom end and considering the active proportion of the wire (not under screws etc.) as 250mg (1/4) X 5 = 1.25W That would be our lowest maximum excess output if 1 low capability wire was acting in optimum conditions. (1/4) X 2 X 50 = 25 W That would be our highest maximum excess output if 2 best capability wires were acting in optimum conditions. If we knew the exact capability of every wire we received and we knew the optimum conditions to achieve that capability, we can all go back to our day jobs! We are learning every time about the conditions, when we know the best typical conditions - we can then start rating wires - well, those that appear to be active.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 30 Aug 2013 12:14:31 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4209</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4208</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Robert Greenyer: 5-50W per gram of active material under what temperature and conditions? Surely, 25W of excess heat from US Cell v1.3 B would be so visible that even just subjective observation would be probably enough to assess that it's a real effect. @MFMP: by the way, you might want to increase pressure to promote active wire loading. See here pressure in Cell B vs the resistance of CuNi1 wire: http://i.imgur.com/WksUY9C.png http://i.imgur.com/WksUY9C.png I would suggest to reset H2 pressure to a higher value (even higher than normal, for example around 5 bar under load) after closing down the shared plumbing valve to slow down the pressure drop and therefore making loading quicker overall. As a side note, while massive loading hasn't triggered yet on CuNi2 wire, a very visible negative temperature coefficient (NTC) behavior has shown instead (meaning, the higher the temperature, the lower the resistance. This is the opposite of what happens in most standard alloys): http://i.imgur.com/qaINI4y.png http://i.imgur.com/qaINI4y.png At least this proves that you didn't fit a standard NiCr resistance wire instead of a Celani one :) It's interesting to note that after a Celani wire has started loading (like the CuNi1 wire), besides the slow drop in resistance due to hydrogen absorption, it will show a PTC behavior.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 30 Aug 2013 11:03:52 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4208</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4204</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@All Some wonderful data and thank you Ed and Ecco for some great contributions and analysis, your work is making a big difference. I will release more information for the blog on Celani cells/wires soon. We now know that the wires we have been supplied are claimed to produce between 5-50W per gram (depends on number of layers, layer types, statistical variation in production, treatment in transit/during experiments and specific experimental conditions). There is around 275mg/m in cell B, so the range of potential output form approximately 500mg of active wire would be 2.5 - 25W - if we get everything right and whatever we do. More wires will likely be in the lower end of this range until more understanding is established. If we can get to a point of accepting the Excess, then long runs at a level of excess will be very important to establishing how robust the wires are and their potential to produce large amounts of power by weight over time. As a side note, the next GPU from NVidia for mobiles (Tegra 5) will be over twice the processing power of a PS3 in a 2W envelope.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 30 Aug 2013 09:46:59 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4204</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4203</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Edwin Pell: I'm not so sure it's the case here. Something caused temperature on Cell A to increase and that of Cell B to decrease almost exactly at the same time. This is not a good sign. http://i.imgur.com/NFpSY34.png http://i.imgur.com/NFpSY34.png I would first make sure that both cells are well (actively) ventilated. This seems at glance to be the result of a heated air pocket moving around.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 30 Aug 2013 09:02:04 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4203</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4199</link>
			<description><![CDATA[After analyzing data a bit more in detail, I found out that the pressure sensor in Cell B seems to read a few (3-7) millibars higher on average than that of Cell A, regardless of the actual pressure value. For all intents and purposes, when the shared plumbing (valve) is open, pressure is therefore the same on both cells. This gives more credibility to the 2% higher pressure on Cell B than Cell A when the valves connecting both cells were closed. Even taking into account a 7 millibar offset, pressure was actually higher (~1.6%) and not the result of some artifact (for example due to a faulty sensor) or the error margin. It remains to be tested whether both cells have indeed the same internal volume or not. If they do, then I would test making both cells opaque, to make sure that some how Cell A isn't retaining less heat than cell B. Or even swapping the cores might do (which might have to be done anyway at some point to check if the differences in gas leaking or cell location aren't affecting pressure). If after all these checks, pressure on the cell containing the active wires will still be noticeably higher when applying power (from a cooled state/ambient temperature) after closing the valves, then there won't be many conventional explanations left to justify the excess heat. If perfected, this "differential pressure protocol" might be useful. The critical point is making sure that both cells indeed have the same internal volume, however. Tests and/or appropriate calculations to make sure that small differences won't affect significantly the end results will have to be made.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 29 Aug 2013 22:07:13 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4199</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Malachi Heder says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4197</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@ All We are seeing data from yesterday on the data viewer again. It looks like it will be slow to come back but it is updating.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Malachi Heder</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 29 Aug 2013 20:20:34 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4197</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4196</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Malachi, thanks for keeping us updated. We understand about the many things that need to be fixed due the lightening strike. The important thing is that the data is safe. This experiment, for me, is the first clear demonstration, at HUG, of excess heat and there is tons on science in the R/R0 data.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 29 Aug 2013 20:01:45 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4196</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Malachi Heder says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4195</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@ Ecco It was not this small. When the power first came on and they reached a plateau T rise for cell B was 112 and cell A was 104. Then over the next 12-15 hours they slowly came very close to one and other.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Malachi Heder</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 29 Aug 2013 19:49:22 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4195</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4194</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Malachi Heder: thanks for the test. The cooldown part doesn't seem very interesting. The opposite of what I expected happened. This could either mean that Cell A leaks hydrogen quicker than Cell B or that the cells do not have the same internal volume. The second part was more interesting and consistent with what would happen in a hotter cell with the same internal volume than the other, although the pressure difference was very limited, only about 1%. However if you're reporting that as of writing both cells have about the same T_Ext1Rise temperature (106.9 vs 107 °C -- I wonder what happened), and that apparently when no excess heat is generated, Cell B shows slightly lower T_Ext temperatures than cell A, then that seems to be in the ballpark of what one should expect. Was T_Ext1 Rise difference between both cells this small when the test was performed?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 29 Aug 2013 19:36:39 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4194</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4192</link>
			<description><![CDATA[It would be also interesting to know the results of the short test involving closing/opening the shared plumbing that I proposed a while back. Maybe in a blogpost update if live data won't be back online soon?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 29 Aug 2013 17:35:50 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4192</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4191</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Is the experiment still running? If so, could you tells us what the delta in temperatures is up to? Thanks.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 29 Aug 2013 17:20:02 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4191</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4190</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Once we have found the top with the experiment as is we could switch to powering the second wire instead of the first. Then we could try powering both wires. Powering both at power level P1 for a total of 2*P1 input should raise the outer temperature by a factor of two (for example 260 degree versus 130 degrees. But the wires will both be at about 130 degree above the temperature of the hot one when only one is heated.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 29 Aug 2013 00:15:42 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4190</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4189</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Perhaps it needs higher temperatures. Direct heating could fix that. Also, heating both wires at the same time will make the cell hotter for the same total input power, which might help triggering loading.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 Aug 2013 23:44:57 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4189</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4188</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Folks, we have one wire at say 600 degrees and one wire at say 300 degrees. It seems no surprise that the cold wire is not loading. Am I missing something?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 Aug 2013 23:02:59 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4188</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4187</link>
			<description><![CDATA[With paint I would first use clear, possibly highly reflective clear paint as a base coat, then spray high emissivity black paint on top of it. I don't think it would be easy to make a good job with paint, though. It's not easy to make painted glass truly uniformly 100% opaque.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 Aug 2013 19:01:06 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4187</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4184</link>
			<description><![CDATA[On Ecco's point about an opaque tube, an opaque tube just inside the outer glass tube would work fine. Say a copper tube. A quick upgrade.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 Aug 2013 18:08:32 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4184</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4183</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ron B: it's a possibility, since the cell had a Quartz glass tube which is as far as I know more transparent to IR radiation than borosilicate glass (used in the V1.3 cells), but there's no way to know for sure until a test using a 100% opaque tube is attempted, which is something I've been advocating all along.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 Aug 2013 17:50:12 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4183</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4182</link>
			<description><![CDATA[T_GlassOut remained almost exactly the same along the entire time, meaning that there apparently wasn't any actual increase in internal heat generated. Possibly it could be that the heat generated by the fusion effect was transparent to the glass container but did affect the mica temperature????]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 Aug 2013 17:26:41 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4182</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Malachi Heder says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4180</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@ All Thanks for being patient with the new data not updating. We had a lightning strike on Monday and it has messed up or fried a few things on campus. Our electrical engineer and software guru is very busy and will get to the network problem soon.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Malachi Heder</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 Aug 2013 16:52:27 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4180</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4179</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ron B: ok, now I see. With that end date, T_Mica slowly increased together with resistance over time, but at the same time pressure slowly decreased as well due to hydrogen leaking. T_GlassOut remained almost exactly the same along the entire time, meaning that there apparently wasn't any actual increase in internal heat generated. This is the main reason why in the end the experiment was deemed inconclusive.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 Aug 2013 16:21:05 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4179</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4177</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ron B: I tried checking the time range you pointed to and I can't see any of the upward swings in resistance you highlighted (from Resistance Red. Red was the active wire afaik), except for short milliohm-level ones I previously mentioned which could have been caused by anything since the setup wasn't under very well controlled conditions and used vertical orientation which caused several unwanted (an unexpected) side-effects. See here: http://i.imgur.com/F1rPIph.png Furthermore, I seem to remember that T_Mica was being used for output power calculation (apparently not shown anymore), not T_GlassOut. If you were referring to the heating wire (Blue), it did indeed appear to be increasing resistance over time, however I don't think that was due to increased heat from the active wire. The same effect is happening on NiCr wire #2 in US Cell 1.3A, even though it's supposed to be inert. Hydrogen exposure with heat is probably physically affecting it. This cell doesn't seem to be slowly getting hotter over time (disregarding manual step increases in input power), however. I would suggest focusing on the latest differential-mo de cells, which, despite several flaws that I hope will be addressed soon, are giving more promising and interesting results than what the first cells did.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 Aug 2013 14:52:07 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4177</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4176</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ron It may have something to do with:- CuNi1 Celani Wire previously loaded in Cell A. May have been damaged in previous experiment and further, the nano structures may have been damaged or partially lost in unwinding and re-winding into Cell B This wire is actively heated/powered with main power currently 37.5W CuNi2 Was original Celani wire in CellB that was not loaded in the Vacuum protocol. It is still effectively loading for the first time. It is only passively heated/powered with 0.25W for monitoring]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 Aug 2013 14:10:58 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4176</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4175</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@All Ed Storms and others on vortex were discussing the importance of cracks in the active material. I've been very interested in the micro crystal evolution of the material. The thing that has me curious is that the cracks, forming and closing during the annealing process, are bound to progress from a crack to no crack. In that process the crack would get infinitesimally small. Small enough so that single atoms of mono hydrogen could be trapped as non uniform transitions occurred along the crack. If two atoms were trapped and the crack closed, would the force be enough to fuse the atoms into helium? If so, the helium being a noble gas would be trapped inside the metal. I've not got enough physics background to have an opinion on this and wonder if others do. Variations in the micro crystal evolution due to absolute temperatures as well as delta temperatures would seem to account for many of the odd things we've seen here with the data.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 Aug 2013 14:00:58 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4175</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4174</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Bob, Any theory about why the resistance of the two Celani wires are behaving so differently in cell B? They respond opposite to each other during transitions of temp or pressure.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 Aug 2013 13:53:28 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4174</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4172</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Edwin Pell: at around 600 °C the wire would start glowing faintly in the dark. Perhaps some tests could be performed on Cell A in order to safely check out empirically at what input power this actually happens (although this would only be valid for the H2 pressure at which this test is performed -- the lower the pressure, the higher the wire temperature for the input power applied).]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 Aug 2013 10:10:03 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4172</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4170</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ecco Sounds like a good test, thanks for the suggestion @Edwin Am I right to assume you are calculating this from SB? If so can you share your workings?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 Aug 2013 08:14:10 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4170</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4169</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Ecco, I estimate the wire is already above 600 degree C.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 28 Aug 2013 03:20:03 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4169</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Malachi Heder says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4162</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@ Ron B Take a look now, It should be back and it should have the correct labels. It's a little weird because the old boards for this test are gone. It should work :-)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Malachi Heder</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 27 Aug 2013 16:07:18 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4162</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4161</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ On the other hand, if for some unknown reason excess heat is real and does really have a strong T^4 correlation, it becomes clear that using significantly higher temperatures than current ones will show a very clear signal very quickly: http://i.imgur.com/jfon2hv.png http://i.imgur.com/jfon2hv.png Increasing temperature from 400 to 500 °C (the CTC cell can reach these temperatures, but apparently the reactor geometry isn't suitable for these active wires) would for instance more than double the excess heat produced.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 27 Aug 2013 12:24:51 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4161</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4160</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ecco I guess another option is to swap out the Celani wires with NiCr at the end of a data gathering period and compare evolution of temperatures over input power range under similar H2 pressure regimes.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 27 Aug 2013 10:00:24 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4160</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4159</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Thank goodness Malachi! The mica cell is the one that showed us the most gain last year. The last time I looked at that data with the new viewer, the fields were not correct (like resistance labeled as watts) It would be awesome to have that one back.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 27 Aug 2013 01:30:48 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4159</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4158</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Ecco, I see your point. Well done.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 Aug 2013 23:40:52 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4158</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4157</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Edwin Pell: :: Ecco, can you see the images now? I am using imgur.com Yes, I can now see them. :: at 19:37 it sure looks like Cell A is igniting! Now that is a problem. Raw NiCr wire works like a Celani wire??? The chamber as whole is igniting??? Other??? I think they are doing something in their lab (check out ambient temperatures, they are abnormally high) which is causing temperatures to increase weirdly on both cells. @Robert Greenyer: :: If indeed we see a "topping out" this may be a strong counter argument to your scalar function hypotheses. Could we not indeed already do some modelling to see if we could predict a differential under this scenario?? I haven't tried that for Celani cells currently under testing at HUG Labs, but following my idea that there can potentially be some sort of artifact proportional to the radiated heat, I tried overlapping a simple xy chart of temperature T vs (T^4) / [c] to that of the STM replication I posted a while back and I feel it is strongly correlated with it, which is not a good thing: http://i.imgur.com/MwvUleq.png]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 Aug 2013 23:15:51 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4157</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4156</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Ecco, can you see the images now? I am using imgur.com]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 Aug 2013 23:14:26 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4156</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4155</link>
			<description><![CDATA[at 19:37 it sure looks like Cell A is igniting! Now that is a problem. Raw NiCr wire works like a Celani wire??? The chamber as whole is igniting??? Other???]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 Aug 2013 22:17:51 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4155</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4153</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I have done some more analysis on the derivative of R/R0 at several time scales. Here are the plots. They look a lot like Dardik's superwave. These plots focus of the time slice that looks most superwave like. This analysis works for the whole run and shows lots of structure. http://i.imgur.com/oLPtCwk.jpg http://i.imgur.com/KLy0HyP.jpg http://i.imgur.com/mr6omtM.jpg http://i.imgur.com/JvQ8ct8.jpg Here is a bigger slice of time http://i.imgur.com/ZBhyP7G.jpg]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 Aug 2013 21:55:36 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4153</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Malachi Heder says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4152</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@ Ron B Not gone, but hidden. We now have a publish feature that allows us to hide old test. Just to clear some clutter. If you need some data just let us know and we can publish it out there again.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Malachi Heder</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 Aug 2013 20:46:42 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4152</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4151</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Ecco, I was talking about excursions of ambient during the leveling out and slight increase of resistance in the cell B. Wow... the old data from Mica/Macor cells is completely gone : (]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 Aug 2013 20:35:10 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4151</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4150</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Edwin There is a lot of movement in the lab right now.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 Aug 2013 16:47:21 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4150</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4149</link>
			<description><![CDATA[New behavior, R/R0 step down, slide down, step up(!), slide down and Cell A is rising and Cell B is falling. How odd. More new behavior R/R0 slide down, step up, slide down, step up, slide down.... and no more excess heat from power input step]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 Aug 2013 16:27:30 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4149</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4146</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ecco Well, as was found in the V2.0 protocol in US - the excess did not really get started until after a certain temperature, there was a bump post Debye and after that it topped out, indeed it then started to drop a little. It will be interesting if we see a similar thing here. If we get to a maximum offset from the control and not higher. I am writing a blog at the moment on new information obtained from Celani about why his cells are the way they are and the excess power potential from his wires. The latter is the key relevant point here, basically he says all the wires we have been supplied will be in a range of maximum output under normal simple stimulation, which, without further additions or stimulation will top out. If indeed we see a "topping out" this may be a strong counter argument to your scalar function hypotheses. Could we not indeed already do some modelling to see if we could predict a differential under this scenario??]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 Aug 2013 16:01:10 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4146</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4144</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@All It is interesting to note that the Tb-mica has, in the last few power steps, gone through the Debye temp of Ni which means at least one of the wires went through it in part previously. Could this in part account for the switch in dominant cell from passive to active?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 Aug 2013 13:32:05 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4144</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4143</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Ecco, You may be right, although during the point in the graph you're indicating. The excursions of ambient on Cell B were quite large (4x). I would suggest that this is the cause for the the leveling/increa se of resistance and not an indicator of the amount of hydrogen absorbed????]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 Aug 2013 12:30:57 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4143</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4142</link>
			<description><![CDATA[If you take the derivative of R/R0 it has oscillations with a period of about 3 hours! The data is averaged over one hour and then the derivative is done. http://i.imgur.com/AKrO5c1.jpg?1]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 Aug 2013 07:26:54 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4142</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4141</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Here are images of the delta between the model and the measured. The first with no term dealing with the slope of R/R0. The second with a term proportional to R/R0. But not taking into account the six hour delay between max R/R0 slope and max heat. http://i.imgur.com/NCLMli8.jpg http://i.imgur.com/trEbd2E.jpg]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 Aug 2013 06:38:29 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4141</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4139</link>
			<description><![CDATA[It is interesting that B endothermic with respect to A from about 3:30pm on the 22nd to 8:30pm on the 23rd about -8 degrees from where it is predicted to be. I think this is a real physics effect. Takahashi and Kitamura see the same thing with D on Ni at the start.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 Aug 2013 05:20:51 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4139</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4137</link>
			<description><![CDATA[No need to rush it Ecco. As long as we're getting increasing excess power, the experiment is working well. The way these cells worked before is that when the resistance levels out and starts to increase we got lots of excess power. I hope we'll see that again.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 26 Aug 2013 02:26:39 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4137</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4136</link>
			<description><![CDATA[25+ °C would roughly imply an excess power of more than 10W. That would start being pretty substantial and not easily explainable by some kind of artifact or measurement error, although some basic checks to be sure of that really need to be made (making the cells opaque, closing the shared gas tubing, etc).]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 25 Aug 2013 22:48:04 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4136</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4135</link>
			<description><![CDATA[It is getting exciting 7+ degrees! I am willing to bet that it gets to 25+ degrees. Just my guess.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 25 Aug 2013 21:51:16 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4135</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4134</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Edwin Pell: T_Ext thermocouples (from which T_Rise values in the chart below were calculated) are located on the outside surface of the glass tubes, all others are inside the cells and thus exposed to hydrogen (afaik).]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 25 Aug 2013 19:25:07 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4134</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Edwin Pell says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4133</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Are the internal thermocouples exposed to hydrogen? What I have learned (the hard way as the saying goes) is that hydrogen destroys all thermocouples and all RTDs. Destroy in the sense that the values shift, alot. Sometimes they stay shifted and sometimes at room temperature they return to normal. Defkalion has the right idea keep sensors out of the hydrogen. I am going from reactor version2 to version 3 to do this.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Edwin Pell</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 25 Aug 2013 19:19:04 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4133</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4131</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ron B: Cell B has two Celani wires, but the second one hasn't started absorbing hydrogen massively yet. Its triggering temperature must be higher than usual. I would estimate any apparent excess power from Cell B to be in the ~5% range at the moment, anyway. Not enough to be significant with the current setup in my opinion. As a side note, longer term data shows how higher temperatures are beneficial to hydrogen absorption (R/R0 for Active wire #1 shown here, that is the one which MFMP had problems making absorb hydrogen in the last "official" runs): http://i.imgur.com/KbJBNZv.png http://i.imgur.com/KbJBNZv.png I think it will be interesting to try applying moderate power to both wires (~30W each) so that internal temperatures will increase significantly, leading to quicker hydrogen absorption and perhaps a more substantial excess heating effect. Before that, I would really want to put a metallic foil on these cells so that temperatures can be increased further without the need for increasing power too much, in addition of removing issues about wire emissivity artifacts. @MFMP: as a reminder, live data is lagging badly.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 25 Aug 2013 18:07:00 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4131</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4130</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The Cell B is starting to show increased heat output over the cell A. Hopefully this test can run long enough for the Celani wire to become completely saturated with hydrogen. : )]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 25 Aug 2013 17:34:26 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4130</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4129</link>
			<description><![CDATA[What's happening to NiCr wire #2 in Cell A (inert)? Its resistance has been steadily increasing all along, even when power was constant. http://i.imgur.com/LFHObga.png http://i.imgur.com/LFHObga.png NiCr wire #1 has a way more predictable (and expected, for a resistance wire) behavior, which mainly depends on power/heat rather than time/H2 exposure: http://i.imgur.com/HsAqukW.png http://i.imgur.com/HsAqukW.png @MFMP: live data from data.hugnetlab. com has become rather unstable as of late. It's getting updated in real time for only a few hours a day.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 24 Aug 2013 01:31:57 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4129</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4127</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@All I think switching the active cores, if possible, after a fun and re-running may address many of the potential questions. Mathieu has just informed that he has fixed the pass-throughs on the EU cells and that they will be able to start a differential run. These are passively cooled in free air and it will be interesting to compare them to the US configuration.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 22 Aug 2013 10:08:40 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4127</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Jack Cole says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4125</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ecco, yes that is a difficulty of differential tests. The conditions must be as exact as possible for both cells. I can imagine a difference like the cylinder having either a heat sink effect or storing up heat eventually resulting in a higher temp (likely occurring in less than 8 hours or so). It could even switch from storing heat to acting more like a heat sink at higher input power levels. I can't tell if the connection of the bracket to the cell has any insulating material, which would reduce the effect. Anyway, that's more of a thought experiment that could be followed up on if they find apparent excess heating.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Jack Cole</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 22 Aug 2013 01:15:40 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4125</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Jack Cole says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4123</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Great job on adding the picture of the setup to the live data page. It does raise something worth considering. The cylinder attached to the bottom of one of the cell holders may *could* result in a heat capacity effect altering the temperature of the cell attached to the same bracket.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Jack Cole</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 22 Aug 2013 00:40:49 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4123</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>charlie tapp says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4122</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@anyone were did everybody go? it has been like 24 hours with no posts. feels like xmas eve]]></description>
			<dc:creator>charlie tapp</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 21 Aug 2013 19:33:35 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4122</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Paul says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4120</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@ecco do you think that as MFMP calorimetry is refined and improved that your scale might tighen? 10% gets interesting and 15% > signal-to-noise ? It seems like, short of a breakthrough in the powder experiments, that will be the operating range for a while.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Paul</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 21 Aug 2013 18:13:21 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4120</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>charlie tapp says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4118</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@ ecco so mabee a nice explanation of a good calimeter and how it works would go good on the home page also.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>charlie tapp</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 20 Aug 2013 17:24:03 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4118</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4117</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@charlie tapp: although many people do (even I sometimes do, for clarity) it's not correct to write about "COP" when not dealing with heat pumps. COP mainly refers, in the HVAC industry, to the apparent heating or cooling performance of a heat pump which can only move heat from a place to another. A heat pump won't actually produce heat, can only operate when there is a temperature difference between a cold and a hot side, has a limited operating temperature range, and the heat it moves can only be of low grade/low temperature, generally only suitable for space heating. A working LENR reactor on the other hand, in addition to the electrical input power provided to make it work, would actually produce its own heat, without taking it from a different location; therefore any gain would be "true", not "apparent" as the COP term implies, which means that potentially much higher temperatures are possible (and energy generation too if the heat produced is higher enough). In this case, "gain", "excess heat", "excess energy/power", "efficiency" and similar terms should be preferred instead of "COP". For the same reason, people are wrong when they say that a "COP" of 4-6 from a LENR reactor would be "the same as a heat pump". It's not, because the heat would come from the reactor itself, not get "borrowed" from a different place.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 20 Aug 2013 17:11:43 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4117</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>charlie tapp says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4116</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@ecco loud and clear totaly different than wiki explanation and everyone elses that deal with heat pumps. might be a good idea to make a section at the home page explaining how the whole cop thing works. and what we are looking for even though you just did because unless you are on this particular blog you wont know and as time goes by this blog is archived deep down inside mfmp websight. i tryed last night to find something old to remind me, but failed. and i have been following since day one. thank you p.s. you should move to minnesota i am sure they would let you live at the lab.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>charlie tapp</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 20 Aug 2013 16:53:17 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4116</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4115</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@charlie tapp: I'm not a MFMP team member, but in my opinion, providing relatively reliable calorimetry: 10% gain and less: disputable 15% gain: starts getting interesting, but many would still regard this as within error margins >25% gain: this would almost certainly be a signal above noise >50% gain: definitely above "curiosity". This will be enough for most honest skeptics >100% gain (COP 2): this will convince pretty much everybody that the effect is real I think we (or at least, I) want to see at least 25% excess (COP 1.25).]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 20 Aug 2013 15:45:52 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4115</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>charlie tapp says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4114</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@mfmp also myself and probably alot of other people would like to know what is a good cop. tryed to look it up but everything revolves around heat pump calculations. what are we looking for in celani cells as good cop.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>charlie tapp</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 20 Aug 2013 15:29:20 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4114</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>charlie tapp says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4112</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@ryan hunt when doing electrolisis expierements i would use about a teaspoon per cup dont know on that one though. i also would use canada dry gingerale it works very well as a electrolyte. my new one is a little cleaner because of the stainless or aluminum coating on the outsides. you guys should build a stainless one if it looks to need more testing. mabee a nickel sintered one? the original inventor used 220 volt 50 hz he believed the bells were tuned to 50 hz causing the boiling i have not had to nor know how to tune a bell i asume you add or remove metal? i personaly believe that the boiling is caused by rapid expansion and contraction of h and o as it is ac and polarity reversing back and fourth, because it will do nothing in just distilled water needs to be conductive.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>charlie tapp</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 19 Aug 2013 20:40:43 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4112</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ryan Hunt says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4111</link>
			<description><![CDATA[First Results on Davey Device: COP between 0.65 and 0.9 depending on a few assumptions of temperature rise. We'll try again with the baking soda and see if the icky goo goes away. We did see the water start bubbling immediately when powered up.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ryan Hunt</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 19 Aug 2013 19:17:31 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4111</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ryan Hunt says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4110</link>
			<description><![CDATA[It arrived and we gave it a first try. We didn't see this note about baking soda in time. We'll try that, next. How much would you recommend? I won't embarrass you at all. I respect your willingness to explore it and let us test it. Way smarter people than me have made mistakes about energy devices before.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ryan Hunt</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 19 Aug 2013 19:10:15 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4110</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>charlie tapp says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4109</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@ryan hunt the davey device should reach you by today i would think. you may want to try distilled water and baking soda to avoid corosion i cleaned it up before i sent it. made a new one friday so i wont miss it. i am realy interested to find out power mesurements as some people claim cop 200 try not to embarass me to bad if it has no cop. call if you have any questions.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>charlie tapp</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 19 Aug 2013 18:23:17 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-4109</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
