The Playground

LOL. WLF.

Sorry, wrong person. But I suggest you carry learning more English: it will help you to understand the nuances of what I have previously written.

I think it's better that Henry is allowed his downvote button back!

So Henry, find me something I've written, and quote it in full, where I confuse fantasy and hopes with facts...

LOL case closed! Guilty as charged.

Henry, do you think Brass will melt when subjected to the heat of the court... Or will his reputation merely be tarnished?

Quote from Paradigmnoia

I will repeat again and again, that the Lugano emissivity error is a real error, and can very easily be tested without much skill or expense.

Quote from THHuxleynew

Levi thermography artifact

Really so simple ? As far as we know the report circulated among experts before it was published AND is also signed by a number of other Professors and NOT only Levi.

I sincerely don't think that contains trivial errors. To many people has seen it and has to many authors that scrutinized it.

The report is still available at University of Bologna link after years.

Is quite strange also that discussion, on a report with a 3.6 COP, also after that the ERV data has been published with COP>70 !

Is much more easy for me to think that NOW after so much time the only subject who would like to "destroy" the report is IH for his own interest.

Well, if RB0 would ever get around to those integrations that were promised many many months ago, maybe we could have had this sorted by now.

Anyhow, just get your free small sample of dried durapot 810, stick a thermocouple on it, heat it to a mild glow, and give it a go with an IR device with adjustable emissivity. Go on, don't delay or make excuses now. Science is waiting to happen!

Re: Low pressure boiling. (start at 9:34 if you are in a rush)

Cold hands reduce vacuum flask vapour pressure? Does he ever explain his trick?

Zeus46 ,

Just jump back to the beginning. He has a partial vacuum, caused by boiling the flask open, then sealing it as soon as it stops boiling. He does the boiling-by-hands trick again near the end of the video (~12:39) with the same apparatus, without doing anything to it in the meantime.

... Cold hands reduce atmospheric pressure below vapour pressure. Cool video.

Although not too great a video of the event, in one of his thermodynamics videos, he crushes a container like the cans in this video, then once this can cools on its own sufficiently, the water inside begins to boil on its own.

Quote from ele

Really so simple ? As far as we know the report circulated among experts before it was published AND is also signed by a number of other Professors and NOT only Levi.

I sincerely don't think that contains trivial errors. To many people has seen it and has to many authors that scrutinized it.

The report is still available at University of Bologna link after years.

Is quite strange also that discussion, on a report with a 3.6 COP, also after that the ERV data has been published with COP>70 !

Is much more easy for me to think that NOW after so much time the only subject who would like to "destroy" the report is IH for his own interest.

Are there any of those experts willing to put their head above the parapet and show how TC's paper is wrong? They way things work is that in science you reference previous work and make your new points showing how this differs from previous stuff, and why your work is an advance. that is exactly whast the TC paper did, and it has convinced every scientist who has read it (except possibly Levi - but from his comments Levi has either not read it, or not understood it).

Maybe TC was wrong. But then it would be easy for anyone to write a proper rebuttal explaining the error, making precise references to previous work including TCs. that has not been done because it is not possible.

You should ask yourself why, if they are correct and TC wrong, there has not been published any correction of TC? Anyone will tell you that in terms of formal quality the TC paper is good, and better than the original report.

As for the UoB report being still available. That is normal, and anyway the report contains valuable data. You don't retract a paper except in extreme circumstances. Luckily there is a published correction (TC's paper) so nothing else needed except for people like you.

Maybe. But he doesn't touch the liquid (well the lower half of the bottle...), and I think I see condensation on the inside of the glass. Also he seems more concerned with spreading cold water over the bottle than touching it?

The trick is lowering the vapor pressure with a heat sink, which are his cooled hands. His hands don't have enough available heat to raise the water temperature, especially after dunking them in ice water.

A little OT but interesting I a nanoparticle close up. Maybe a tool for looking at the lattice. 23000-mapped-atoms-vid

And why I am at it a "background of the emdrive" paper worth 20 minutes but its not optimistic . Flights-of-fancy