Spread over the entire device, that would be too small for you to detect, wouldn't it?
Yes, for sure IF its isothermal. But small hot spots might be visible and that's why I mentioned the limited resolution. The spec for the camera is 382 x 288 pixels, and the 2 cm dia.active area of the sample was about 250 pixels wide. So each pixel saw slightly less than 0.1 mm square area. That's still a lot of territory at the atomic level.
I looked at Frank's LEC sample with an Optris IR camera, and saw nothing above the background temperature. At 320x240 pixels it's probably too coarse to be useful even close to the device.
Here's some x-ray spectral data from my ongoing tests. The count rate was quite low, far too sparse to account for the ionization current. But one peak was detected that might be a useful clue.
Today's world needs to change
Waaaa. I just watched the flick "Wanted" before this. Two of a kind, superb eye candy production, epic gratuitous violence and non-stop thrash. Good ride but a very dark after-taste.
understand your approach. You would follow a subtractive paradigm where the characteristics of an LENR-absent system are sufficiently closely characterized that when claimed LENR mechanism is added its properties can be deduced as observed minus baseline.
Not quite, but close. What I suggest is piecewise building of a model schema. Make sure the basic structure is solid by testing it against known parameters. In particular, there are some places in the thermodynamics where values of constants measured empirically can be inserted, to see if the predicted behavior matches the system under study. For example emissivity can be set to any arbitrary value and the resulting thermal behavior calculated, but the result may not be realistic.The Lugano study of Rossi's device is a good example of this kind of modelling flaw.
Anyone familiar with the concept of positive feedback can understand the possibility of a LENR reactor meltdown. To model such a system behavior it's useful to explore the parameter sensitivities, and I think that is what you are working on. In electronic systems, such investigation is sometimes done in order to specify component tolerances, especially where positive feedback or metastable behavior is involved.
Overall then, I am assuming that the temperature dynamics of the reactor are described by an autonomous nonlinear 1-dimensional ODE with state variable T. So we have dT/dt = f(T, parameters) where f() is a nonlinear function of T given by heating rate minus cooling rate (the red line minus the blue line).
Thanks for your clear explanation. As an experimentalist, I want to test a model against data with known accuracy, for example a set of calibrations. This eliminates the unknown LENR part from f(). By starting with such a test, the usefulness (or not) of a model is shown for a specific experiment. Once that is done, the model can be used to predict the effect of a temperature-dependent LENR reaction.
A model lacking such calibration can still be used to explore the parameter space, but it will yield hypotheses, not predictions. It's still a useful tool, but the context should be made clear to avoid unwarranted criticism or conclusions.
It's good to see some serious thought given to developing this model. I do find the graphs a bit unclear, for a simple reason. In a typical graph we expect the dependent (output) variable to be in the vertical axis, and from my technical background I have an instinctive tendency to interpret visual data from that perspective.
So I would prefer that the graph with the T^4 radiative cooling to have reactor temperature on the vertical axis, giving the thermal Q of the system as the slope of the curve, or dT/dP. If I understand Bruce's examples correctly, the red trace curving upward does show decreasing dT/dP. The vertical axis is labeled as dQ/dt in the first two graphs, which may be the equivalent of input power P.
Power dissipated by Newtonian cooling depends linearly on the difference between the temperature of the thermal mass and ambient room temperature and so appears as a straight diagonal line
It's a nice start Bruce. But of course it's only valid for small temperature rise above ambient, and where conductive cooling is the dominant heat path. I suspect and hope you will extend this model to include more realistic non-linear behavior with both convective and radiative cooling considered.
Properly Cited' means just that. It does not mean 'paste in everything'. It means giving a clear attribution to the source of the information - like a link.
Yes, understood. That is why I included the link to the original article, in case the bigwigs at Nature happened to notice it missing in the original post. It's probably not an issue but they are known to occasionally be testy about such things.
@'Gregory Byron Goble
Could you edit posts to a more reasonable length please. As a good journalist you should be aware of the TLDR phenomenon, 'too long didn't read' is a very human reaction.For example it would be better to paste in the abstract (including the author's names at the top), followed by a link to the paper
The article posted above is apparently from Nature: Communication Physics, published on 25 March 2021 under Creative Commons. The rights and permissions include the following:
"This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons CC BY license, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited."
This Shouldn’t Happen”: Inside the Virus-Hunting Nonprofit at the Center of the Lab-Leak Controversy
After just 4 days, FM1 has broken Greg Goble's record for longest post, with an extraordinary 10,416 words. However, it appears the content is all cut-and-paste from an article, shown by a link to the source with apparently identical content. So in the judgement of MFMP (me) it doesn't qualify for the Unobtanium Medal.
That said, we have decided to initiate a MFMP WBT (Wasted Bandwidth Token) with posting #7555. Because such long posts seem to never end, the token content is similarly unbounded.
Notice of Official Contest Award
We are pleased to announce you have won the MFMP Unobtanium Medal for 2022. This award is in recognition of your post #7516, which sets a new Lenr-Forum record for length at 3916 words and 13 embedded images. Let us hope that this record will remain unbroken far into the future.
The Unobtanium Medal
Are you running at above the voltage required to split water? Anything under 2V and you are unlikely to be doing co-deposition.
I found that about 1.2 volts was enough to start the evolution of hydrogen. It appeared as very fine bubbles which formed a foam on the surface of the electrolyte. Presence of hydrogen in the foam was shown by a sensitive combustible gas detector. Of course that doesn't prove co-deposition, just the possibility of it. Previous attempts at plating with 2 volts produced a poorly adhered layer, maybe due to more entrapped gas in the deposited metal.
I also found alkaline plating of Fe produced a smooth uniform coat but no LEC voltage. Evidence of substantial trapped water was also seen, with vacuum degassing taking several hours to reach ~1 mT of residual pressure.
Curious what examples you have of 3 and 5?
These are opinions, don't need no stinkin' examples. And notice that there's no #4 - only prime integers are real, the rest are just products.
I seem to have a serious case of cynicism this morning. Is it infectious? Let's try it:
1) All news is fake. Don't believe anything you hear or read. It's just entertainment.
2) All pictures are fake, both digital and chemical. Show me the real thing!
3) Equations are just guesses and have little if any connection to reality.
5) Don't show me any data without describing in detail where it came from and how.
Hmm, now it's time for lunch. Bye kids....
In our last validation, at 295C Exh was about 10W. At 590C it goes to >600W, or about 60x with a doubling of temperature.
I had an out-gassing problem with my 304 stainless steel cell when over 350°C. Nitrogen and CO2 both appeared along with water vapor from the reduction of oxides. Post-testing with vacuum showed no leakage issues. For operation at 500°C or higher, a ceramic inside coating would probably help with this. It would have to be thermally matched to the steel COE. Maybe an exhaust header coating would work, something like cerakote or jet-hot.
It should probably be in the Playground area.
And Lo! it was gone there! AlanS 
the ones by magicsound that were positive but not as long lasting.
My results were similar to Ken's. My only positive voltage measurement was due to electrolytic shorting by plating debris, found on disassembly of the cell. I'm not optimistic that co-deposition by Fe plating will reproduce the LEC effect, and I'm moving on to Pd plating as used by Frank Gordon.
And Lattice Assisted Muon Energy...LAME of course.
Not to disparage Holmlid's work, but I just can't resist a stupid acronymic pun.
