... not entirely incongruous with the record (although I believe the record not to be flawless).
What does that mean in English?
... not entirely incongruous with the record (although I believe the record not to be flawless).
What does that mean in English?
What blackbody spectrum to these data? What temperature?
P.S. Your diagram is schematic. Here is Bob Greenyer's superposition of 17 data grabs (supplied by can of this forum and Pekka Janhunnen: see http://disq.us/p/1zgv87d). What blackbody spectrum would you attach to this data set?
yes pressure rock steady at 0 absolute pressure in bars (the meter was claimed one that was absolute but the 0 could only be a gauge pressure) and that 0 held day after day even when low pressure storms went through Miami.
And if the pressure was truly 0 how could the steam be circulated with out that vacuum pump?
Oh yes, by contract Penon was to have the instruments recertified after the runs and he did not take the data, he just received the data from Rossi.
Oh sure, because Interested Observer did such a magnificence when he said his comments aren't intended to further science on that replications thread, among other things./s Of course it comes to no surprise that you would be defending him. Did you defend him like this when he started blowing chunks on that other thread?
Meanwhile, we are all incredibly impressed by your hundreds of recent posts that are furthering science at a dizzying clip. Why would I even try to do that when you have it covered? Besides, in your capacity as self-appointed attack dog, you have disqualified me from doing something I have zero interest in doing. Woe is me.
What blackbody spectrum to these data? What temperature?
P.S. Your diagram is schematic. Here is Bob Greenyer's superposition of 17 data grabs (supplied by can of this forum and Pekka Janhunnen: see http://disq.us/p/1zgv87d). What blackbody spectrum would you attach to this data set?
The answer is simple.
A thick plasma does not have a black body spectrum.
From that the formula for calculating the energy of a thick plasma is the same as that for a black body you can not conlude that it has the same physical properties as that of a black body and thus that you can match a black body spectrum to that of a plasma.
No. The output is calculated from the flow. When one Big Frankie was taken off-line Penon reported that the flow dropped from 36,000 to 27,000 ... 25% less.
(Again, just based on the main Penon report.)
And, based on Penon's reports, 36,000 L/day was flowing in the middle of October 2015 when 1 Big Frankie was described by Penon as offline.
This situation was maintained throughout most of Oct 2015 - Feb 2016. You can even see in the photos that the IH people took in their walkaround on the day that the trial ended, that the bottom Big Frankie has had its plumbing unhooked from the heating circuit.
A thick plasma does not have a black body spectrum.
From that the formula for calculating the energy of a thick plasma is the same as that for a black body you can not conlude that it has the same physical properties as that of a black body and thus that you can match a black body spectrum to that of a plasma.
I am having trouble following your reasoning. It seems to me to both contradict what you said earlier and even (in the final sentence) be self-contradictory. Could you restate it please?
I am having trouble following your reasoning. It seems to me to both contradict what you said earlier and even (in the final sentence) be self-contradictory. Could you restate it please?
OK, Using the theory for plasma radiation , when calculating the power of a thick plasma, this leads to the formula for the thick plasma power of J = σ T^{4}
^{}
This is the same formula as for the power of a black body, but was not calculated assuming that the plasma was a black body, but is derived in another way
Since the formula of the thick plasma power is the same as that of a black body, one can incorrectly assume that the thick plasma is a black body.
But it isn't, only the formula for calculating the power is the same.
And since the thick plasma doesn't have the properties of a black body. you can't match both temperature curves.
And true skeptopaths lack the courage to say what they mean and mean what they say, once they realize the other side is allowed to treat them the same way.
Kevmo,
Rossi’s Ecat has not now, or ever, produced more Energy Out than Energy In, he is a fraud and a conman.
There, I said it, again, and I mean it.
Now, as a believer, please reciprocate,
Say it here and now that you believe that Rossi’s Ecat produces Energy Out>Energy In
Don’t sit in a fence with your holier than thou demander of proof attitude, just
Man Up, and tell us all what you believe.
In lieu of an “I believe” I fully expect another psychological diatribe, so have at it.
Display MoreOK, Using the theory for plasma radiation , when calculating the power of a thick plasma, this leads to the formula for the thick plasma power of J = σ T^{4}
^{}
This is the same formula as for the power of a black body, but was not calculated assuming that the plasma was a black body, but is derived in another way
Since the formula of the thick plasma power is the same as that of a black body, one can incorrectly assume that the thick plasma is a black body.
But it isn't, only the formula for calculating the power is the same.
And since the thick plasma doesn't have the properties of a black body. you can't match both temperature curves.
In a thick plasma by definition the inner radiation is in thermal equilibrium with the ions, which themselves are in thermal equilibrium. There is relatively very little radiation from the outer edge, so the radiative characteristics are the same as for a black body. That is borne out by what you say, which is the power calculation equation is the same.
The way to look at it is that you get direct (non-thermalised, non BB spectrum) radiation from the electrically pumped electron transitions in the ions. Then you get thermalised (BB) radiation from the non-pumped transitions. Nearly all the non-BB radiation gets absorbed and re-emitted as BB in a thick plasma. The radiation is not quite exactly BB since the plasma itself is not in thermal equilibrium with its surroundings, but good enough.
At least that is my understanding, and it shows why for example the sun radiates as a near black body.
Display MoreOK, Using the theory for plasma radiation , when calculating the power of a thick plasma, this leads to the formula for the thick plasma power of J = σ T^{4}
^{}
This is the same formula as for the power of a black body, but was not calculated assuming that the plasma was a black body, but is derived in another way
Since the formula of the thick plasma power is the same as that of a black body, one can incorrectly assume that the thick plasma is a black body.
But it isn't, only the formula for calculating the power is the same.
And since the thick plasma doesn't have the properties of a black body. you can't match both temperature curves.
Thanks for the re-explanation.
This still leaves open, however, the issue of how you would use the Wien relation for Rossi's SK data. How would you do that?