Debate: Does LENR needs a good theory, or good lab-rat

Those two should write a heat transfer paper together. Nobel prizes all round for sure.

Jed wrote "10 or 15 L of water can vanish overnight"

Oy vey .

Take heart Shanahan

This can be easily accommodated in the BITE ,Byzantine Interior Theory of Evaporation,

by using T=50C, Humidity= -100% and V=100m/s (223 mph)

The actual ambient averages of 6C, 89 % ,and the slow convective velocity in a

lab vent are mere complications.

The slow velocity ( less than 1m/s) can be estimated by considering

http://www.engineeringtoolbox.…ht-ventilation-d_122.html

and internal/external T=10/6 Celsius,,

however the velocity over the surface of the bucket is likely to much lower still

since this is velocity is in duct above the vent which has a lesser crosssectional area than

the region around the bucket.

Putting these complications into BITE :

Vapor pressure of water (6*C): 0.933 kPa
Air humidity: 89%, vapor pressure in the air: 0.89 x 0.933 kPa = 0.830 kPa

Y for water is 2272 kJ/kg
ER =(0.933- 0.830)x(0.089 + 0.0782V)/2272 … V=1
Evaporation rate is: 0.76 10^-5 kg/s/m^2
 
Area: 0.049 m^2 Height 20 cm Volume10000mL
Rate: 0.00037 g/s

32.2 gms per day. Bucket will evaporate in 310 days, 0.96mm/day. (NATURALLY)

These complications appear to support the commonsense experiential notion

that evaporation of 10000 grams of water in a day is anomalous and much greater

than that expected due to unheated convective flow ( 32 grams per day).

Jed mentions 10000 grams evaporated overnight which is even more anomalous.

Perhaps the standard bucket is different on the Savannah River?

Or between 40-60 cats.

Quote from maryyugo

Now that you mention it, I have not seen many Nobel prizes for LENR yet, have you?

Which proves what exactly Mary?

Other than your firm beliefs in your own assumptions...

http://physicstoday.scitation.org/do/10.1063/PT.5.2012/full/

http://physicstoday.scitation.org/do/10.1063/PT.5.2012/full/

30 years time lag .Nobelprize 2047.

No ones worried about that. ..the NobelPrize may not even exist by that time.

Thanks for that Jed,

I didn't not know much about Mizuno. The inside temperature of 10C fits with scenario below.

Spring is unpleasant.6 degrees. Wind-chill 5 degrees . cold wet windy. Intermittent Squalls rolling in off the sea from Siberia

I can imagine Mizuno in a thick overcoat hefting the bucket in the freezing sleet with the water slopping out..

and the sides of the reactor steaming....

how soon could he placate the little genie he had rubbed up the wrong way?

Mizuno was born in Asahikagawa in 1945.

Spring and fall are generally short and transitional in that city. Japan's lowest temperature ever (−41 °C (−42 °F)) was recorded here.

He sounds pretty tough to me. Maybe he has a newer lab..at 72 he should have one.

"Mizuno describes the dank, underground laboratory. He does not mention that his own laboratory is the size of a broom closet and so crammed with equipment you can barely fit in the door. The roof leaks. A large sheet of blue plastic is suspended over the corner of the room, funneling the rain water down to a sink and away from the computers, meters, power supplies and complex, delicate, beautiful handcrafted experimental apparatus, made of aluminum, stainless steel, platinum, palladium, gold and silver " 1998

http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/MizunoTnucleartra.pdf

zeus and bocijn

Have you guys ever heard of 'sensitivity analysis'? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensitivity_analysis (This is a 'poor man's' was of doing error estimation.)

The idea is vary the controlling parameters to see what impact that variation has on the derived conclusions. Zeus doesn't see to get this at all, while bocijn is actually displaying single parameter set results for specific cases. What I did was examine the previously unexplored idea of ventilation-assisted evaporation from a system that did in fact start out warm and then cooled off. As I mentioned, the last set of data I looked at got the 10L evaporation done in 1.75 days. At *that* point, I realized I could play around with parameters and come up with conditions that could produce the desired 10 L evaporation in 24 hours, as well as other sets giving other results. HOWEVER, at *that* point, it becomes a waste of time, because THE CONCLUSION is that you will actually need the REAL DATA for the REAL CONDITIONS during the event, not averages, possibilities or guesses. And with anecdotal stories, you never get that. Just look at Rossi...

It's not worth more of my time to argue this with you guys. If you don't get it, it's because you choose not to.

Quote from kirkshanahan

As I mentioned, the last set of data I looked at got the 10L evaporation done in 1.75 days. At *that* point, I realized I could play around with parameters and come up with conditions that could produce the desired 10 L evaporation in 24 hours, as well as other sets giving other results.

Yes, as me and Bocijn suggest, it's possible to get weird answers if you use lunatic inputs.

And until you show the numbers your 'playings around' are based on, the assumption has to be that you are firmly inside that camp.

Quote from kirkshanahan

The idea is vary the controlling parameters to see what impact that variation has on the derived conclusions. Zeus doesn't see to get this at all,

You're not controlling parameters, or providing a sensitivity analysis either. You are plucking impossible numbers out of thin air, and hoping no-one pulls you up on them.

Quote from kirkshanahan

THE CONCLUSION is that you will actually need the REAL DATA for the REAL CONDITIONS during the event, not averages, possibilities or guesses.

see here: The Playground

There's the possibility of a janitor bumping into the bucket. Unlikely, but not to be excluded out of hand.

and lab rats! Don't forget the lab rats!

Kirkshanahan "It's not worth more of my time to argue this with you guys"

That's so out of character.. Shucks

I accept your acknowledgement of defeat. Bless Your heart

I was just preparing my sensitivity analysis too.

I have calculated... Btw the energy from the hydrogen in 1 kg of Pd being catalytically combusted to water