Like reference to religion, I thought that climate change was not allowed as a topic of discussion on this site.
Mavericks- and why science needs them.
-
-
GW is certainly not encouraged as a topic. We have enough trouble keeping our cool in here as it is..
-
There is no point whatsoever in discussing GW here, but the frequent correlation between LENR acceptance and climate denial is fascinating.
-
Here's a maverick idea for y'all:
I'll mix 5% lithium carbonate into Durapot 810, and cast a 1000 W heater coil into it made of nichrome 80. Check for excess heat.
(Very possible that this may cause the ceramic to fail to cure, or cured ceramic to melt at much lower temperatures than normal. Maybe it will melt and make rubies...)
Do you think I should get a neutron detector or alarm before lighting it up?
-
Who knows what will happen. But I suspect that there will be far too much oxygen around to show you anything funny.
-
No matter your opinion on GW, all here hope LENR is real so our carbon emissions are reduced. Since we all agree on that, no reason for argument.
That said, I do think that while mans CO2 contribution is minor, it adds up. Now let the battles begin!
-
as long as you deny evidence of LENR, you are making friendly fire to GW theory. Better not talk of GW not to make argumentation by association which is a known fallacy.
-
-
Non-lithium version running 220 C internal at 30 W, ~ 6.5 V AC. Going to be a hot one.
(Minimum SSVR setting, V floats around between 5.6 V and 7.6 V)
0.14 power factor, LOL.
Humming- buzzing sound.
Initial run to see if the ceramic breaks currently running.
Ran at 220 C for 2 hours to make sure water is all out. (Was previously baked in oven for 3 hours at 225 F, followed by 1.5 hrs at 525 F to set ceramic, a few days ago).
Dialled to ~ 10 V now to soak.
....
650 C internal at ~20 V. Power density is probably 4 to 5 x the Lugano device. Ceramic block (not including wires) is only 75 g.
Dialled up to ~ 25 V. Needs a better external thermocouple attachment. Too hot to fiddle with now... Emissivity supposedly > 1, based on external thermocouple and IR thermometer reading. (Emissivity set to 0.74 to matches internal T).
....
1188 C internal T at ~ 41 V.
Somewhere around 800 C on the outside. If I breathe on it or move around the external T drops a bit.
No way will I be able to turn this up to full voltage without melting something - which is why there is an internal thermocouple.
I'll take it in 5 V steps to 1350 C inside T, maybe 1370 C and see how it holds up. Nice orange glow at present.
....
Sparks at 50 V and 1350 C ish inside T.
Coil vaporized > 1 cm where exposed.
The temperature was still rising for several seconds after I cut the power. Thermocouple survived (although now permanently encased in fired porcelain).
All thermocouples are in the same location now, settling to the ambient T to check for variances among them.
....
The next one needs to be twice as big or half the potential wattage. That was 70 cm2 and not even 600 W before it melted.
-
I was simply observing that climate denial seems commonplace among the LENR crowd.
If one weights the crowd members by science training, I suspect the aggregate so weighted would show quite the opposite of your observation.
-
I agree. I know 20 + people active (for various values of active) in the LENR field. Not one of them is a GW/CC denier, just the opposite.
-
-
-
I agree. I know 20 + people active (for various values of active) in the LENR field. Not one of them is a GW/CC denier, just the opposite.
I don't know any educated person who denies GW. But there is a question of how much and what causes it. No question that the IPCC exaggerates things.
-
I don't know any educated person who denies GW. But there is a question of how much and what causes it. No question that the IPCC exaggerates things.
Anyone who thinks there is no question about such a statement cannot be understanding the inherent large (highlighted by many people on all sides of the debate) uncertainties. You would expect a certain institutional bias - on the other side we can see an expected opposite "hyper-caution" effect when views get toned down for political reasons. Both these effects are dwarfed by the inherent uncertainties: one reason why those of good understanding would want to err on the side of caution.
-
On the subject of mavericks.
I'd say that science needs people who don't care whether others agree with them, but do pay attention (great attention) to all prior work, treating it in a respectful but skeptical manner.
A maverick might be such a person, or might be someone who is reacting against consensus and doing the opposite. Such a person is as limited by others as a herd-follower.
-
Of course no educated person denies the existence of global warming. I erred in not specifying AGW - that people are largely responsible. Ashfield’s comment to the effect that the human cause is questionable is what I have seen frequently from LENR enthusiasts and is consistent with a bias that not only are science mavericks valuable (which is certainly true) but that ONLY science mavericks are trustworthy - which is absurd.
bocijin’s inference that any correlation is meaningless is suspect at best.
-
There have been fruitless and interminable debates on the Vortex list about global warming involving some of the participants of this subthread. I suggest we consider the topic to be in the same category as politics and not pursue it here.
-
Anyone who thinks there is no question about such a statement cannot be understanding the inherent large (highlighted by many people on all sides of the debate) uncertainties
"95% of Climate Models Agree: The Observations Must be Wrong." And leave it at that.
-
I’m with you Eric. Zero interest in debating global warming here. AA is welcome to the last word.
Want to Advertise or Sponsor LENR Forum?
CLICK HERE to contact us.
CLICK HERE to contact us.