<?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>Sat, 02 May 2026 19:51:47 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/en/component/jcomments/feed/com_content/97" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>Scalare says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-79</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Hello Ryan, In my opinion It seems to be more depending on the total power ripple: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/100549486/Event.jpg See also at total power of 46W the effect on T_glass of the 0.6W periodical small drop. http://dl.dropbox.com/u/100549486/46W%20T_glass.jpg Is it stiil planned the long test at constant power mentioned in your answer to Ecco some days ago? It would be useful to avoid possible effect of slow transient when you will replicate Celani’s exp. (at 48W only on NiCr wire, I suppose). It is possible to appreciate a small increase of T_glass in the last 15 min., more evident on T_well hereafter. Could I propose to make a test at 48W only applied to a single wire for 24h? http://dl.dropbox.com/u/100549486/46W%20T_well.jpg]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Scalare</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 28 Oct 2012 09:11:38 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-79</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Jeff says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-72</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ Good point, but basically always showing input and output power clearly should make it easier to understand if there is no (or if there is) production of energy. I understand output may have be derived, but input is more direct.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Jeff</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 24 Oct 2012 01:09:35 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-72</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ryan Hunt says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-71</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Notice the little ripple on the Glass_out temperatures? I'm guessing that may be convection oscillations.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ryan Hunt</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 23 Oct 2012 18:58:10 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-71</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ecco says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-70</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Thanks for the graphs. Unexpectedly, it's not immediately clear just by reading them that a physical failure in the cell occurred. One could even mistake this event for something related to unexpected LENR effects. It is necessary to keep eyes wide open and crosscheck as much data and visual clues as possible to avoid any possible misinterpretati on of apparently anomalous reactor behavior. On that regard, using a transparent cell has been in retrospect a very good idea.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ecco</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 23 Oct 2012 18:06:41 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-70</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
