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.
Paradigmnoia
Member
- Member since Oct 23rd 2015
Posts by Paradigmnoia
-
-
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.
-
Also, you cannot measure flames with standard IR equipment. IR heat radiation is a collective action of a surface, which a flame does not have. A flame has selective spectral light distribution including in the IR band, plus flames are transparent to some degree. Abuse of measurements does not quality as measurement. Recall the propane flame pretended to be 125 to 300 C, which is quite short of the real temperature.
-
“These gases: HHO, Ohmasa, Santelli - MagneGas, carry EVOs that destroy matter at low temperature similar to cavitation while the EVOs absorb the heat of combustion of the gases. MFMP measured the temperature of Ohmasa gas combustion at about 230C as I recall where tungsten vaporized.”
The first sentence is bullshit. You made it up, and the proof is terrible, in fact it is unproof, the opposite of proof.Secondly, tungsten begins to ‘vaporize” in air at less than 650 C.
Third, I “vaporized’ tungsten with an ordinary propane brazing torch.
-
King is referencing various research into plasmoid lifetimes. What he says about Ohmasa gas comports with what I know about that subject.
Unfortunately the cheapest propane oxygen brazing kit flame properties also comports with the properties of supposedly special gases such as Browns and Ohmasa, including the cutting of tungsten and sharpening the rods to needle ends, but never welding the tungsten.
-
King is not a reliable reference.
-
This Video is beyond my pay rate but if anyone wants to have a go at it here it is.
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.An old story goes that in ancient times a blind artist paced the Old St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome, and sketched an excellent drawing of it in near-perfect perspective. Most artists at the time that could see, couldn’t paint or draw in proper perspective to save their skins.
-
Hot wire anemometers also have a Q and because they are actively heated to maintain a temperature to do the measurement they are sensitive to air velocity and especially turbulence.
-
Display More
Looking at the rest of the report, I would say it was simply down to incompetence (and that is being kind).
As you pointed out, there is no record of the flow rate they supposedly recorded. And you are right that if the inlet temperature was measured at a throttle point, then the venturi effect would reduce the temperature seen by the thermocouple.
Of course there is no record of the power taken by the airpump, which is all part of the system - as the unit would not work without it. As mentioned above, measuring the inlet air temperature does not allow them to ignore the pump power.
Another glaring error is in not carrying out a measured run without the arc - just with the air flowing. This would have at least shown the temperature distribution caused by the airflow itself.
Allied to the above is the issue of exit thermocouple placement. As mentioned earlier in this thread, the "vortex tube" has a natural propensity to create a radial gradation across the exit. Ideally there should have been a long diffuser between the unit and the temperature sensors - so that the exit air could mix properly. Placing thermocouples at the immediate exit, as they have done, will subject them to massive inaccuracies, depending on their position in the flow (i.e. the edge will be hot, and the centre will be cold - just from the cyclone/vortex effect).
Bizarrely, there is even a section in the report which acknowledges that very point:
That quoted section above, on its own, completely invalidates the entire report.
The measurement of the electrical power going to the arc is another issue, but it isn't even worth going into that.
My thoughts on a mild Venturi effect was that the apparent air flow rate could be measured with high accuracy but not actually measuring a representative velocity zone, more than trying to cool a TC. If the air temperature has stabilized in the outlet then the air velocity shouldn’t affect the temperature at the thermocouple meaningfully.
My coolest invention for the Mizuno-style mass air flow calorimeter I built was a velocity diffuser in the outlet that left the air flow going very smoothly at the exit. It has a wider chamber that the inlet of the outlet pipe entered partly into, an internal gap of about 20 cm, and then the final outlet pipe exited from partly inside the chamber, sort of like a fat glass pack muffler with the fibres blown out. The whole thing was about 60 cm long and made of thin commercial cardboard mailing tubes. The tubes stuck into the larger chamber were held in place with two opposite facing, gapped, overlapped foam tubing rings that fit the gap between the different diameters and also sealed the pieces. It can be taken apart and put back together like giant Lego.
The temperature distribution was always pretty good with no meaningful difference detected at the outlet locations. Measuring velocity at the outlet before the muffler was added was a nuisance due to complex velocity distribution. The plan was to permanently install a vane meter but that turned into a rabbit hole. Vane airflow meter manufacturers rarely discuss the Q of the meter, but it sure matters when one tries to stick it inline to a pipe… The short version is that around a pipe, vane anemometers can read almost anything you want it to, which for me is too arbitrary for a measurement. -
10 years ago when I was new to lurking around LENR sites, I would see A on the vortex and think, “Gosh, how can he know such solid details of all these paradigm-breaking devices and how they function?”. He wrote so factually, and was sincere in his interest for sure. Now I am sure he is baiting a challenge to his facts so an intense philosophical conversation might ensue on the deep roots of LENR with an equally-equipped conversationalist. And so he bides his time…
-
All this goes to show that is never simple to perform any of these tests. Proving intention to deceive is another complete matter. Taking care of checking every possible source of error, and constrain it, is the only way to go, but with anything that requires to meassure air flow on the mix, the error bars can be huge.
The error bars can be as messy or clean as one cares to make them with air flow, and generally everything else. Half of the automobiles on the planet (billions) measure air flow with very high accuracy and precision every moment they are turned on.
-
Display More
Hi Kieran,
That is the "revised" IEP report. It differs, a bit, from from the version on the ENG8 website back on October 24th - which was this one:
IEP-REPORT-117-Augst-2023_signed.pdf
On September 21st, ENG8 issued a note about the retraction and revision:
ENG8 EnergiCell Q Value Revised Down.pdf
See below. The original table is on the left, the latest on the right:
Both reports are a travesty, for a variety of reasons. I'll write a bit more about this later today.
How did the heat capacity error slip in? How long have they used the hot value?
-
Are the left and right hand singing from different hymn sheets? Perhaps. But that doesn't mean there's anything untoward going on, operationally speaking.
They come across as completely making stuff up, and that is not good.
The big module was exactly the size of however many 350 W modules and these were well on the way a whole back and now we are working on the 35 W modules of which I will step out and guess that ten of these go into a 350 W module, ad infinitum, so the 35 W will constructed of yet to be designed 3.5 W and 0.35 W units therein.
