<?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>Wed, 15 Apr 2026 08:38:43 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.quantumheat.org/index.php/it/component/jcomments/feed/com_content/163" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>Website says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-8900</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I am not sure where you're getting your info, but great topic. I needs to spend some time learning much more or understanding more. Thanks for magnificent info I was looking for this info for my mission.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Website</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 05 Oct 2017 22:11:58 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-8900</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>twat says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-8730</link>
			<description><![CDATA[At the end of article some links for your help available. We specialize in placing text links on high quality websites. Looking for four proven Internet business promotion methods.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>twat</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 02 Dec 2016 09:58:20 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-8730</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>charlie tapp says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-968</link>
			<description><![CDATA[i dont think thermal imageing will work through the glass, thats how mythbusters got past the thermal imaging alarms in one of the episodes.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>charlie tapp</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 03 Dec 2012 22:22:35 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-968</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Alain Coetmeur says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-949</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Hi, do you still confirm that there is a big question mark on Celani NiWeek measures? Celani said that direct heating was more efficient than indirect heating by the nichrome wire, but that it worked a little. is it coherent with the pressure artifact hypothesis? Celani claims of Anomalous heat are 30%, is it compatible totally with the pressure artifact hypothesis? given Celani various claims, is it possible that all be mistakes, or are there results from lab that looks correct anyway?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Alain Coetmeur</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 02 Dec 2012 17:34:21 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-949</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Jeff says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-947</link>
			<description><![CDATA[This may not be a factor in this experiment where pressures are high, but at low pressures, the thermal conductivity of hydrogen gas is hugely impacted by small amounts of a heavier molecule gas that is added - such as Argon or nitrogen. I forget exactly how low the pressure needs to be - but something less than 10% of 1 atmosphere (1.5 psi). So for example, 1.5 psi of 90% H2 and 10% Argon has much lower thermal conductivity than 100% H2 at the same pressure. The reason is that fast moving hydrogen is *physically* blocked from transporting heat by the much slower moving Argon atoms. 18 years ago, in 1995, I was running a Mizuno replication experiment and I added a very small amount of air (which is mostly nitrogen) to the low pressure deuterium gas and got a temperature rise. I had thought that adding gas should increase the thermal conductivity of the gas but in this special case it was the reverse. It took me about a week to realize I had an artifact.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Jeff</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 02 Dec 2012 17:13:48 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-947</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Rats says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-938</link>
			<description><![CDATA[ I second what observer has said. Is Celani aware of this?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Rats</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2012 21:26:04 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-938</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Jim Johnson says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-937</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I have great admiration and respect for everything that is being done here. I believe the productivity of the current dialog could be increased by supporting it with logical systems diagram. I created a simplistic conceptual draft of such a diagram and have posted it here: https://sites.google.com/site/lenrshare/mfmp-logical-system-diagram. This is crude illustration, but it took me about ten minutes. In about an hour of real-time chat we could create a much more accurate one, which anyone could contribute to to make more accurate still. Each individual element of the system would an easy to reference name that could be used in discussion, and every possible energy flow was clearly identified and labeled. This could widen participation, focus discussion, broaden perspectives and highlight relationships. All the physical details could be mapped right behind it. You're doing great engineering. How about applying engineering to this very valuable dialog?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Jim Johnson</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2012 20:35:44 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-937</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Al Potenza says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-935</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Not to be overly repetitious but once again: would you consider using multiple wires? As many as you can get up to maybe ten? Most of your power input goes to heat up the cell, not specifically the wire. So if the wire is a source of excess heat and you increase the number of wires, your signal to noise ratio will go up. Add enough wires and maybe the considerations you are currently bogged down in will go away. I know the wires are difficult to make but it may be worth doing it.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Al Potenza</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2012 18:30:34 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-935</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>123star says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-934</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I copy-paste what I wrote this in "Worth trying", date: 16 november (there is also the aluminium foil suggestion dating 2012-11-18 24h in Stable Run Write up, I thought about black paint too) [BEGIN QUOTE] In my opinion the spread between different runs with different wires could be due to the fact that the thermocouples are partly heated by direct radiation and partly by conduction. The temperature and the emissivity of the wires and hence their spectrum varies from run to run. We could try to reduce the spread, at least on Glassout, in two ways: 1) Using a steel container pipe (or anything that is either reflective or opaque). 2) Meanwhile, we could try to reduce the spread by putting a radiation shield before the glass_out probe. I'm thinking about a little rectangle of metal sheet inside the tube in correspondence with the glass_out probe, which is external. [END QUOTE]]]></description>
			<dc:creator>123star</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2012 18:24:10 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-934</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>adriano says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-931</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The question is rather complicated! If you do a calibration with nickel-chromium heating wire, instead of constantan, you can obtain a comparison result sufficiently accurate! ;) However if you make an analysis which raises the pressure on the horizontal axis and the vertical axis the ratio between the power and the internal temperature of the gas, will discover a very interesting fact: When operating in calibration is obtained a line to slope almost constant, while if it has abnormal emission line tends to be lower. End of frist part]]></description>
			<dc:creator>adriano</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2012 17:59:32 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-931</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>observer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-930</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Have you informed Celani that some of his results might be invalid? If so, what was his response?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>observer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2012 17:58:41 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-930</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>MB says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-929</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Holmium and others Is IR truly privileged spectrum in this analysis? Is it known that the wire does not emit energy at ultraviolet or radio wavelengths, or even visible ones? (I.e., does it glow?) It seems that any of the materials -- the quartz glass, the gas combinations, the wire coating itself -- will have differential transparency across the entire EM spectrum, making it really tough to measure *energy* in all its forms without a full spectral analysis of everything that comes out. Sounds like a daunting measurement, if not an impossible one. But maybe the physicists in this virtual room can rule these possibilities out. @MFMP team: I am very pleased with your methodical approach and thoughtful analysis. Let's be open to wherever this goes, even if its disappointing. It makes me proud to be a scientist. Keep up the good work.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>MB</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2012 17:37:52 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-929</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>clovis ray says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-928</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Hi, Guys. i know a little about quartz, these crystals has all kind of strange things going on in them , some of the strange stuff may be the quartz it self, its been reported that under great psi it emits a current, so i would say you might want to try a ss pipe with maybe an glass liner and a observation site hole in the pipe.-- just my 2cents, :-)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>clovis ray</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2012 17:30:41 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-928</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>essenmein says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-926</link>
			<description><![CDATA[part 4 Then calibrate delta t to ambient with a range of different input powers to get a good feel for the temp vs power curve of the reactor.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>essenmein</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2012 16:27:42 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-926</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>essenmein says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-925</link>
			<description><![CDATA[part3 Ie make it not see through. Maybe a glass inner lining with steel or similar outer tube if contamination from metals are a concern.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>essenmein</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2012 16:25:31 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-925</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>essenmein says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-924</link>
			<description><![CDATA[part2 The only reason I think there is some glass absorption to IR wavelength effect here is that you see the glass temp increasing with wire temp at constant power when decreasing pressure. Ie hypothesis is: wire gets hotter, emits shorter wave IR which the glass more readily absorbs, thereby increasing the amount of heat it has to loose via convection since less IR portion of power is getting out as photons. IMO this method of measuring excess heat with a clear glass tube looks pretty but there are far too many variables to reliably calculate p_out with glass temperature. If you want to do that you have to ensure the only means of heat loss out of the reactor is convection/radi ation/conductio n from the reactor itself as that will be largely independent of gas pressure and wire temperature, and only dependent on power out of the reactor.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>essenmein</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2012 16:24:42 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-924</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Thermal says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-922</link>
			<description><![CDATA[You have two sources that radiate heat to the environment, one inner and one outer. If the temperature of one goes up the other one must go down, provided that the generated heat is the same. Apparently you have seen both temperatures increase when the pressure drops. Theoretically this could indicate excess heat. But, as Holmium has pointed out, it might be explained by the outer temperature sensor receiving more radiation from the inside and being locally heated. Another explanation could be that the transparency of the glass is very sensitive to the wavelengths of the ir-radiation. Doing the same test in calibration mode could clear out this matter.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Thermal</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2012 11:58:19 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-922</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>David Jones says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-921</link>
			<description><![CDATA[So, what is left is convection losses to the ends of the tubes. To reduce this you need to insert convection baffles.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>David Jones</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2012 11:29:31 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-921</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>David Jones says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-920</link>
			<description><![CDATA[One other point. Thermal conductivity of gases is independent of pressure until you get to very low pressures. Here, the mean free path limits conduction. Below gives reason why http://www.clearskies.dk/OldWeb/Tcondvspressure.html]]></description>
			<dc:creator>David Jones</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2012 11:25:21 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-920</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>David Jones says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-918</link>
			<description><![CDATA[T_mica temp rises with reduced pressure - as you would expect due to lower conduction/conv ection losses - the surprise is that T_glassout also rises - this suggests that T_glassout is first order dependent on radiant energy and this suggests to me that your probes are reading radiant losses and are not in good thermal contact with the glass (glass is also a poor heat conductor) so it might be your probes are reading a higher actual temperature compared to the real glass temp. I also despair that Celani could make such a basic error - if indeed this is the case - at the very least a control run of pressure loss would have been obvious.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>David Jones</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2012 10:46:12 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-918</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Eric Walker says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-917</link>
			<description><![CDATA[The thing about pressure -- I've seen experimental results discounted when there was a rise in temperature while the pressure went /up/. The explanation there was that it was well known that increasing pressure results in higher temperatures. What we're seeing is the opposite -- we're seeing increasing temperature with dropping pressure. I have questions about the idea that a decrease in pressure is resulting in increased temperature due to a decline in thermal conductivity. Just as likely, in my mind, is that our use of thermocouples as a proxy for full-blown calorimetry is making our analysis challenging. In this regime, I wonder whether we just have to look for a P_xs that is several standard deviations above error and hope that our baseline is not too far off.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Eric Walker</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2012 06:58:31 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-917</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Robert Greenyer says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-915</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@All Great debate and suggestions guys! Thanks for providing me with an interesting read this Saturday morning]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Robert Greenyer</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2012 05:39:51 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-915</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Holmium says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-912</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Part 3 (3) The correct kinetic temperature need to be used for the convection, though, if you want to calculate it. (Tr=(emissivity )^(1/4)Tk) Now pressure drops etc should not affect temperatures (of course initially a pressure drop will lead to a temperature drop if it is an adiabatic expansion of the gas which would be a good approximation here - it would probably be too small to notice though) Please go on with the good work, all us observers are excited to see what Celani has come up with.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Holmium</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2012 01:30:29 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-912</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Holmium says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-911</link>
			<description><![CDATA[What you should do is to Paint it with a heat resistant paint, preferably black. Emissivity will be around 0.96-1. Now all radiation will be absorbed by the paint and re-emitted quite black-body like at outer temperatures. You will of course have 3 types of heat losses, radiation, convection and conduction. The convection can be hard to calculate due to still air in the small box around the reactor and the conduction through wires mainly will be impossible to calculate but at high enough temperatures radiation will dominate. So do as you did before and calibrate the temperature with input power where you use the IR camera to measure temperature and integrate the temp^4 data around the reactor. You can set the emissivity to 1 on the IR camera. This means you will measure the radiative temperature which is the correct one to use in the Bolzmann equation with emissivity 1.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Holmium</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2012 01:29:41 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-911</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Holmium says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-910</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Part 2 (3) In the latter case you will measure both absorbed and re-emitted radiation from the gas, the mica and the glass but more also the transmittance of radiation directly from the wire. This means depending on angles you can get more or less which ever temperature between the wire temp and the outer glass temp you want. It will be impossible to even try to integrate it because you need to cover every angle from every point of the glass.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Holmium</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2012 01:28:52 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-910</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>123star says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-908</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Ron Very nice question, if part of the heat transfer is due to gas convection I'd expect that the top would be hotter than the sides/bottom. I don't think that MFMP team has tried to move the thermocouple there yet.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>123star</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2012 01:12:32 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-908</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ron B says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-906</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Does the location of the thermocouple affect the readings for the glass_out? Top of the glass vs bottom of the glass?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ron B</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2012 00:27:48 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-906</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ascoli65 says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-902</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@ Ryan, You wrote: “It is unclear to me how he established his base line for that experiment that resulted in showing approximately 10 watts during the loading in the blended gas” I think that he choose an instant close to 1,66e5 s where the T_Ext_Glass is close to 148 °C [see slide 29] and T_room is close to 25 °C [slide 33]. Assuming P_in=48 W, it gives k_ref=2,3e-9 W/K^4.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ascoli65</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2012 23:20:40 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-902</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>123star says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-901</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@Guy & @Ged Yes, if you compare the Celani wire in He at 3.5 bar (RunHe1) and the same wire in He at 0.5 (RunHe2) you get higher higher temperature with lower pressure. In Cal1, Cal2, Cal3 series and in Cal6, Cal8, Cal9 (isotan wire) we get the reverse (lower temperatures with lower pressure). Hard to explain. I __thought__ it could be due to the spectral response of the glass to different radiation spectrums. Temperature and emissivity of the wires affect their emitted radiation spectrum. References: https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1e3t4J-x208AIlt1dwQ2Wo2MVgjgnocAWH63ivL5R0oM http://www.quantumheat.org/images/blog/data/pfT_GlassOutvsPower.png]]></description>
			<dc:creator>123star</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2012 23:01:21 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-901</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ged says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-899</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I'd like to point out once again the very important point, that helium does not do this, and this behavior is not following ideal gas law (which is, of course, just an approximation of reality). One could try this again with a nitrogen atmosphere to see if this is an effect of diatomic gasses or only hydrogen. Also, the calculations don't explain all of the excess, at least for Celani (nice inclusion of the percentage!). This is rather complex, but I don't by the thermal conductivity explanation, since again helium does not do this, unless it was something particular to diatomic gasses. But then why does argon exaggerate the effect so much? Any explanation has to take that into account.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ged</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2012 22:38:07 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-899</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Guy Ben Zvi says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-897</link>
			<description><![CDATA[If however the emissivity of the gas is lower as the pressure is dropped then it would be hotter (because it radiates less efficiently) and hence more heat is conducted by the gas to the glass and hence its temp would go up. This would also explain why the mica temp goes up. In other words lower emissivity of the gas at lower pressure can explain both mica and glass higher temps, while lower density of the gas can only explain higher mica but not higher glass temp. This can be tested with an IR thermometer or IR camera. Also look for information about emissivity of the different gases at different pressures (I haven’t looked)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Guy Ben Zvi</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2012 22:19:32 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-897</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Ryan Hunt says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-896</link>
			<description><![CDATA[We can't rule out excess heat, yet, but we have found one reason to account for some of Celani's observations that is not excess heat.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Ryan Hunt</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2012 22:04:34 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-896</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Klant says:</title>
			<link>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-895</link>
			<description><![CDATA[So for the dumb ones like me, are you getting excess heat or did you figure out why you appear to be getting excess heat?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Klant</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2012 22:02:27 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.quantumheat.org#comment-895</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
