Here is a home made resistor with a hot spot, seconds before total failure of the coil. The spot sort of wiggled around, grew white hot and then dimmed out.
Paradigmnoia
Member
- Member since Oct 23rd 2015
Posts by Paradigmnoia
-
-
Here is an image of a home made resistor cylinder at 1100 C.
-
An open coil resistor, wound yourself from Kanthal vape wire, can withstand 1200 C for a while, and 800 C almost indefinitely.
I brought several alumina power resistors to glowing hot for a short while, but they fired out liquid (molten) glass when they popped so I won’t repeat that.
If one knows how hot they want, a convection-radiation calculator can tell you how many watts a cylinder of a given size needs to reach a certain steady state temperature. From there, one works backwards to supply a coil resistance and length that matches the physical size desired and power level. I was able to do this within 5% on the first try. I underestimated how much power could be put to the resistor, but the temperature per power in was pretty much as designed. -
Many individual people and many organizations use information from the New York Times for profit. Reporters in other newspapers read the Times and use the information to write their own articles, in their own words, which is what ChatGPT does. I do not see why doing this with artificial intelligence is any different than doing it with human intelligence. ChatGPT does this thousands of times faster and more thoroughly that a person could, so it is a bigger threat to the Times than a single reporter would be, but there are probably thousands of reporters, writers, social influencers and others who make use of the Times. Who -- in effect -- plagiarize it. The Times is not trying to stop these people. Collectively I suppose they do as much harm as ChatGPT does, assuming you consider it harm. I would say it is "influence," not "harm." I would welcome it. If I could have thousands of reporters quote me when cold fusion comes up, I would like that. If ChatGPT usually quoted LENR-CANR.org instead of Wikipedia, I would be thrilled.
Perhaps the Times could negotiate with OpenAI to have ChatGPT say, "according to the New York Times . . ." That would be to their advantage. When you are confronted with disruptive new technology, it is better to find a way to live with it, and take advantage of it, than it is to fight it. This is a fight the Times cannot win.
A human cannot memorize and categorize the entire New York Times historic output. Just downloading it all would have a cost.
-
Display More
QUOTE:
US news organisation the New York Times is suing ChatGPT-owner OpenAI over claims its copyright was infringed to train the system.
The lawsuit claims "millions" of articles published by the New York Times were used without its permission to make ChatGPT smarter . . .
That's hilarious. I would point out to the New York Times that their data was also used to educate millions of people, who have natural intelligence. Are they going to sue all of their readers? Or all readers who read copies in the library without paying for the newspaper?
Why would you make a distinction between artificial and natural intelligence? I do not see why one is a copyright infringement and the other is not.
Will the Times also sue Google and others who index information from the Times?
They make the distinction of personal use or for-profit use, I presume.
-
Regarding John Dash requested the removal of reference... Sample contamination is the declaimer that is almost always used to discredit transmutation activity via the LENR reaction.
And those who have done many hundreds or thousands of sample analyses will see the wisdom in that.
-
External Content youtu.beContent embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.
-
Canaries are extra-sensitive
Canary in a coal mine is for a reason
Crows are easier to find -
We already went through the chemistry of Teflon and how the PTFE ‘un-zips’ years ago. Research that, and circle back around.
Hundreds of people have discovered to their horror that a Teflon-coated frying pan left on the stove too hot can kill a canary even 40 feet away. -
Yet when the flame of the torch was placed on the Teflon, it did not burn and it did not melt, it remained unmarked and straight. And no one was gased.
Held still for the same amount of time with an identical flame distance for the various substances, including replicates and data recorded for analysis, or for as long as someone felt like it on some random stuff laying about?
-
Regarding: "Well, it still looks like burning to me". You have not explained how white hot titanium and copper both cannot melt Teflon when those bright (Not hot) metals touch the Teflon. This contact is maintained for an extended timeframe until the metal explodes. You also cannot explain how the hole in the titanium develops as the bright spot in the titanium dims (not cools). You also have not mentions how both these bright metals explode when placed in contact with the Teflon even when the Teflon remains unaffected through the explosion. Furthermore, you offer no explanation for the detection of metal distruction as seen in the SEM with carbon micro balls located in the middle of those tracks of removed metal. Those identical tracks of material destruction have been seen on SEM in the LION experiment and the THOR system.
The use of Teflon as a failproof indicator of temperature discounts all these imagined provisos about speculative chemical processes that prejudice proper situational evaluation.
Teflon burns really dangerously. It doesn’t need to burn to off-gas something really nasty.
Fluoro-phosgene gas IIRC?
That has nothing to do with the experiment you quote but it is so dangerous to put a torch or excessive heat to Teflon I must comment.
-
So, the newly formed water particles slam into titanium or tungsten at around 2800 C, and maybe as high as 3300 C (realizing this a distribution that could have individual molecules at 5500 C and 1200 C). If those metals ‘prefer’ to have the hydrogen or the oxygen or both, they can take it easily at these temperatures. Not to mention the uncombusted gasses in the flame stream which will freely react. Titanium has catalytic activity with hydrogen so you know it’s going to do something exciting when hit with a shower of 3000 C hydrogen molecules in a oxygen-rich environment.
-
You can use the video above: Titanium sheet vs. OHMASA gas to time the production of holes using the .1 second frame rate. Stop timing after the pinhole first appears.
I am estimating the piece point time for a ‘cold’ flame HHO through the hand.
At one point people were claiming the flame was less than 100 C until the problem with easily boiling water with it was brought up. And moving the IR pyrometer around it might look like that. And then the magic of dissolved metal and the obvious heat on a persons hand. Now it is true that a hydrogen flame does not radiate much heat compared to flames humans are accustomed to. This is because most open flames used by humans have carbon particles in them that radiate as black bodies. This actually cools the flame, by rejecting heat radiantly at the forth power. HHO flames are hot. Oh yeah. Real hot. But because they do not emit much IR the oxidized hydrogen will contain most of the combustion heat until impact with something.
-
Any tax benefit wouldn't even be a drop in the bucket for the likes of Miura & friends. It just doesn't seem plausible to me.
Profitable corporations like to offset potential taxes with losses in research and investments in other companies that are losing money. It is a good strategy that is encouraged by government taxes and laws designed to put some guardrails in. Corporations are more nimble than governments and small research labs and fringe companies are more nimble than corporations.
-
It took about 12 seconds for a platinum welding Electrolyser torch to burn through an orange.
-
If it can be melted it can be welded.
Good luck.If it disappears in smoke, it was burned.
Three years later and still no takers in the HHO cold flame to palm of the hand but hold it still for more than a few seconds not wave it by like a chicken proof.
or the safe version, the palm of hand made of chicken and give it a go. -
Do you accept the empirical limitations on IR thermometers?
Importantly, that one not made for use on gases are not appropriate to use on gases?(IR spectrometry is commonly used to measure atmospheric gas concentrations, so it’s not a fundamental problem, it a design compatibility problem)
-
Do you accept that the melting point of tungsten is irrelevant in an oxidizing atmosphere?
-
You don't accept the proof of EVO activity on the ten yen coin as pictured in the tracks that include the balls of transmuted metal as shown in the SEM micrograph (snowballs and cobblestones)?
Based on the line of evidence and chain of measurements? No.
-
When you say "you cannot measure", keep in mind Axil never measured anything, ever. in his life. He just reads pseudoscience and parrots it back, as long as it supports his thoughts at the moment.
Much of the crux of the measurement problem can be fathomed if not grokked by a $20 purchase of a IR pyrometer and trying things out with it and writing down the results in an organized way.
