Posts by anonymous

Quote from JedRothwell

I uploaded several more papers. Many of them are inconsequential. The most recent papers are here, as always:

https://lenr-canr.org/wordpress/?page_id=3009

I decided to add more papers to the main library, rather than to a "Storms Reading Room." I am adding papers that are directly related to cold fusion, written by authors who asked me to upload their papers in the past. As I said, many papers in this collection are not directly related to cold fusion. I still plan to put them into a separate folder.

There are still ~1,800 left. This is taking too long. I need to write more programs to automate the process. The index system will be simpler than the one for the main library, with no abstract. I cannot automate the process of identifying and extracting the abstract. I am not going to do it manually 1,800 times!

Display More

Thank you Jed -- great volunteer work!

With regard to finding and identifying the abstract -- wait 10 years -- by then there should be an open source (i.e. free) LLM that knows how to read a paper and find the abstract. The OCR will get better too (assuming you are scanning them with a document feeder) so you don't have to waste as much time other than loading them into the hopper. Good OCR should be able to identify text and symbolic algebra, and keep it separate from graphics. Hopefully by 10 years it will be a librarian's dream -- let it crunch for about 1 minute per paper and it is all indexed and abstracted for future search.

Quote from JedRothwell

Yup. CD-Rs are not to be trusted. That is what I found trying to read old ones a few years ago.

The only way to reliably preserve data is with hard disks. HDD or SSD. You can use the ones in your own possession, or the ones at cloud services for individuals such as Google Cloud or Carbonite. I recommend you use both. Keep a rotating set of 3 to 5 backup disks and copy the data onto one every month. Use a program the confirms data integrity. I recommend copying data to both compressed images of the disk, and uncompressed copies of folders. Sooner or later one of your backup hard disks will fail. You will have 2 to 4 others. Probably, when one fails, the others are close to failing. Data is important, so buy new ones. They are cheap these days.

I use ordinary, off the shelf disks with an external caddy; a.k.a. docking station, such as:

https://www.bestbuy.com/site/i…n/6153102.p?skuId=6153102

Display More

Agree w/ Jed. Up to now I have been rotating the disks manually by plugging and unplugging, i.e. PITA and creates wear on the USB connector. Does anyone know/recommend a HDD docking station (i.e. a storage tower with bays) that can handle minimum 4, ideally up to 8 HDDs with ideally a manual switch to take a 2 disks off or on line. (Why a manual switch? Because if a malware virus gets into the computer, it could get into the docking station controller, allowing it to corrupt all of the HDDs. With two always offline, you have dual redundant backup for when the ransomware guys encrypt your everything. Note that a modern 4 TB HDD is more than 2x overkill for my personal storage needs.)

I figure the HDDs are good for about 10 years before the magnetism might degrade requiring a read/rewrite cycle to magnetize the bits. The SSDs -- who knows when a cosmic ray is going to knock some bits out. Never thought about the 9 track tape heads wearing out -- nice thing about a HDD is that the mechanical wear parts all live inside the hermetically sealed enclosure so all you need is a USB connection -- which I would think would be available for the next 50+ years.

Regards to all on here and especially Unsung Jed doing the LENR community great service. Thank you!

"It is difficult to find estimates of worldwide energy costs"

Search the US Energy Information Agency for the international data: eia.gov.

EIA is pretty good, open source, and free of charge as tax dollars already paid for their research as compared to the International Energy Agency which from my recollection wants to charge you for their data.

Jed,

Everything can be made from energy, so driving the price cheaper makes everything cheaper to produce, i.e. all goods and services.

More goods and services, less cost, means that we all get richer in terms of what we can afford to consume over our lifetimes.

Measure it any consistent way, i.e. "real" GDP, more goods and services means more GDP.

And we have not yet included the robotics and AI making the goods and services even cheaper to produce.

Neo-Luddites will fear the unemployment, but ultimately a new equilibrium will be found where we humans have to work less yet and still have more goods and services. Some would call this increased economic "productivity".

Finally, it is not certain as to what size the future CF reactors will be. If the future reactors are large fixed plants, then there will still be a place for more portable chemical fuels that can be made carbon free via electrolysis and chemically engineered hydrogenation of CO2 into traditional liquid transportation fuels. If energy is 100x cheaper, any and all future chemical engineering is economically feasible.

Daniel,

Does your experiment "rule out" hydrogen or deuterium diffusing or leaking through the reactor surface to chemically react slowly with the oxygen in the oven air?

One method is to seal the H2 or D2 in the reactor and then run it for long enough that the excess energy produced exceeds what is in the reactor.

There is a similar but smaller effect due to the iron or nickel in the reactor walls oxidizing -- again can be ruled out by total joules greater than the enthalpy of combustion of the reactor components.

Good luck on the project. My personal suggestion would be to both file the patent AND compete for the X-Prize -- you can use the proceeds for the next phase of your commercialization.

Quote from JedRothwell

That should fix any problem, as long as there are no air currents playing over the box from something like a fan or the HVAC. The entire room acts as the constant temperature background for the calorimeter.

Well, if the ambient room temperature is 2°C higher, the temperature inside should be 202 - 802°C. What else can it be? That is only a small difference in the fixed temperature inside the box. But if your reaction produces only a 10°C temperature difference, say from 200°C to 210°C, that would be a big difference. If your reaction produces a 100°C temperature difference, 2°C would not matter.

Jed -- I think too unnecessarily complicated. If as I believe Daniel intimated, he has cold (tap temperature) water available behind a water valve and a fan to circulate the oven air through a heat exchanger (i.e. like a car liquid cool "radiator"), when the control says it needs to cool it can open the valve the right amount and the amount of watts being removed can be computed via delta-T in the water quite accurately. When the reactor needs heat, the water flow is turned off by the control and power is applied to the resistive heating element. With thick enough insulation and perhaps some foil, the radiation losses and the losses to direct conduction/convection through the insulation blanket (i.e. asbestos, fiberglass, whatever) can be relatively low and will not vary greatly with ambient room temperature or air convection in the surrounding laboratory, such that a 2 or 10 degree C difference doesn't make hardly any watt difference in the measurement to the outside.. Then, we don't have to deal with Seebeck sensors and thermo-electric coolers. KISS - Keep it simple science!

Quote from Daniel_G

We are getting 0.2W per cm2 so our latest prototypes which are about the size of a notebook computer have 40,000cm2 of surface area so if the 0.2W/cm2 heat output holds, these units will produce about 8kW of heat. We don't know until we try but if we will get anywhere near that, but whatever heat is produced will be in a form that is readily convertible into high pressure steam. Also, advanced controls will allow us to remove only the excess heat so COP should be infinite.

Daniel, excellent results. The notebook computers are around 9x12 inches or around 22x30 cm = 660 cm x 2 sides = around 1300 cm2 or around 260Watts going into your calorimetry which I I understand it is a "incubator" (i.e. a rectangular shaped volume like a small oven or incubator) which I assume you calibrate it with a resistive heating element in the incubator using its normal conductive heat transfer through the incubator's insulation which should go linearly with delta temperature. I like your constant temperature regulator design as well -- makes sense and is simple. My understanding is that with sufficient insulation the device doesn't need any more electric heating after "boot strap" (i.e. lighting the fire). I also understand that for long periods (weeks) the device doesn't need to be refueled as all the fuel is within the volume of the reactor and there is no need for new D2 or H2 flow. That seems like a pretty complete demonstration.

Am I correct in my assumptions about

1) Around 200 to 300 watts out with no electric power being supplied?

2) around 1300 cm2 reactor surface area

3) no on-going fuel supplied?

If all true, the world will beat a path to your better mousetrap! I look forward to reading about your success in the next 12 months.

Thank you.

Has anyone actually seen a discharge curve on one of these "vacuum capacitors". I see a lot of calculation about how it supposedly is charging, but nothing on discharging.

A replication showing 3 farads at 28 volts on one of these diodes would be very useful to prove the result. There are any number of older vacuum tubes that have the cathodes exposed to the glass enveloped so as to build a vacuum capacitor. It would be easy enough to hook up the anode to the cathode of the tube and then have an external anode on the other side of the glass to make the "capacitor". All I want to see is the discharge curve of a discharge into a resistor. I would be shocked if it is anything more than uFs equivalent, but who knows.

Alan Smith

@shane D

OK, you're cutting it. I understand with the crowd getting uncivil.

Thanks for hosting the discussion. Please watch Rossi to see if there is something more and you can reopen a thread. This skled/sklep thread was a great one.

Cheers for a Happy New Year!

Alan Smith,

I am a long time anonymous lurker here in LENR Forum. I STRONGLY DISAGREE with shutting down the technical discussion on Rossi's ECAT-Lep or whatever he calls it. Here is why.

This LENR-Forum community of posters provide a strong highly critical response to whatever Rossi and ECW put up about the purported products. The analysis provided ON THIS THREAD _did the work for me_ ... it was clear that commercial circuit boards and power supplies that I would have NEVER FOUND and matched images to online were hooked up in a manner that could not provide conclusive proof that the ECAT-Lep did anything in the 15 minute demonstration. A great example is that Xeon HID Headlamp power supply unit. I highly doubt that Frank at ECW would have allowed this detailed level of analysis.

Rossi will drop more hints ("factoids") about what his device purports to do technically in the following months. Without this thread there is no place concentrated on the internet that will discuss and refute the apparent tricks.

By leaving the thread up you do the technically minded community of posters here on the thread a great service -- you save us all time in independently analyzing and researching each factoid.

I have come to the belief, through my analysis, partially by reading the postings of others, that the purported ECAT-Lep does nothing. All that was needed was a multimeter in current mode in series with the resistor. Both Rossi and Levi refused to do this. Further, dissipating 12.7^2/1.4 = 115 watts x 0.4/1.4 = 33 watts in the two wires (16.5 watts each) would make them very hot as they are rubber insulated and have no way to shed the head. If the 33 watts was entirely dissipated as suggested here in electrical clips, then that is 16 watts a side into an alligator clip. From my analysis, as best I can tell, the circuit has the solar panel in parallel with whatever the volt meter is measuring across so that the room ambient light puts up the residual voltage that Rossi calls "condenser" effects. The fact that during the video the voltage slowly drops appears as if some element of the power supply is heating up while the video is running, increasing its resistance.

Lastly, using a cheap $40 sine wave power meter (found by forum members here complete with its specifications) to measure the current draw by a switching power supply was CLEARLY disapproved in the specification for the power meter. Why -- because the power meter probably uses a microprocessor to sample voltage and current and then can only compute the power to put on the digital display using the formulae that has the voltage and current both being perfect sine waves with a phase displacement. If the switching power supply uses current that varies from a sine wave, the sampling randomly misses current spikes and by the devices specification itself, doesn't work. Thusly, the power meter measures nothing and the paradoxical result that the power goes UP when the device is turned OFF is not paradoxical -- it just confirms that the power meter is being used beyond its capability of measurement.

I learned most of this from reading information of other forum posters. I will keep "watching" Rossi. I need you to PLEASE keep the forum alive. It does not promote Rossi. Instead, it allows for technical criticism of Rossi's inadequate demonstrations.

Thank you.

Quote from AlainCo

Some articles explain best is to wash your hands with hydroalcoolic fluid or soap...

Mask may be good for any similar disease, like flu, to protect others.... it seems socially promoted and accepted in Asia... not in France...

Flu is dangerous, and as asthmatic, my doctor explained me, that it may not kill me normally, unless it does kill me... 17 dead in France already. Thousands every year.

If masks lower the probability of infection by 33%, it is worth it to wear both for the individual and to improve the basic reproduction ratio for the herd. Masks, hand-washing, plus limitations on contact for both susceptible and infectious members of the population should lower the reproduction below 1. It is also possible that flushing toilets as compared to squatting toilets would lower the fecal infections probability -- but that is a mass construction/renovation problem for the next epidemic.

Quote from Alan Smith

Viruses are not immutable, they arise through mutation and continue to mutate as they are passed from person to person. Some mutations make little difference, some make it more benign, others make it deadly. SARS and Spanish Flu (1918) became more benign - though it took a few million dead before Spanish Flu lost its potency. In the UK in the 50'5 we had an epidemic of 'Asian Flu' as it was called (1956 from memory). That strain started out dangerous and faded in strength until it becaoe 'ordinary'. At the moment this virus is known to be infectious, obviously, but wether that is by direct touch or wether it is truly 'pneumonic' where infection can be picked up from the air in a crowded train or plane is uncertain. The exponential growth suggests that it is pneumonic, so get your face-masks on, or stop breathing in public spaces.

The problem with corona virii is that they reproduce internally to the cell so that there is no way to mount an immune response while it is replicating internally to that cell. It's "cloaked". That is why a vaccine is unlikely as even training the immune system.

A mutation that makes the virus less infectious would get evolutionary de-selection compared to a more infectious sister strain.

Like the sister corona virus, the common cold, having had the virus only confirms temporary immunity. Hopefully this temporary immunity will last long enough to carry the recovered person through to the end of the oubreak without occurrence. Even if the immunity is only good for a few weeks, it would be enormously valuable in the body of trained medical personnel who can tend to the more severely cases without risk of re-infection.

Quote from Wyttenbach

Most confirmed first dead had a health problem - this is the other side of the story what will lower the overall death toll.

The "had a health problem" is an attempt to stop uninformed readers from panicking, i.e. propaganda for non-technically minded people who cannot reason statistics for themselves. The CFR for SARS-COV from the WHO 11/2003 consensus document from Hong Kong (where there was less State pressure to hide the fatalities and more modern facilities in 2003 than in mainland) was 52% for >=65 (n=87) compared to 0% for 0-24, and 15% for 45-64. Most people over 65 have some "health problems" if they have survived that long, so this is like saying that the cause of it being cold is there is ice on the ground. I don't blame the government for attempting to keep an uninformed public (that may panic) calm by offering up reassuring factoids that have nothing to with the seriousness of the problem. In fact, this is good media management as panicking the population would be much worse. I still think this can be dealt with. But it is a very serious epidemic for anyone over 45 years old.

We have yet to find out the true CFR for this related corona virus -- it will be known in retrospective later. The original nCov 2019 cohort of 41 from the Lancet hospital has an apparent CFR at the time that first data was published of around 15%, but the denominator needs to be adjusted for the 6 of 41 who were still hospitalized at the time of publication (Jan 24th). Of note all those patients were admitted as a group on December 31st and the cohort was post selected on the basis of positive blood tests (as an additional 20 or so were excluded because they tested negative). While we could expect more of the mild cases don't present for treatment going forward, we could also expect the extreme aged not to present for treatment. Thus, both old and young will be underrepresented in the government published statistics.

Lastly, the raw (unadjusted) CFR of China mortalities/(cured + mortalities) published by their National Health Commission today Feb 4th thru midnight Feb 3rd at 490/(490+892)=35%. At this stage that is all the data we have. I would expect the CFR to end up being similar to SARS which in the WHO retrospective was around 9.6%, or maybe lower (for nCov), but not the 2% number which is the current mortalities/confirmed cases ratio. While there may be more ventilators in China today (in 2020 vs 2003), their numbers pale compared to cases. That is why there is triage happening -- insufficient facilities so the medical staff must allocate the facilities according to those most likely to benefit from it. That may be why strangely the suspected case count did not go up today -- no capacity to treat them. You have seen the videos of the packed hospital hallways from last week. If their factories can build another 50,000 ventilators and train laypeople on how to operate them in their new hospital/quarantine facilities, that would be a very positive.

At least there is hope while these patients remain alive for some cure, maybe a new application of an existing antiviral medicine, or some otherwise clever trick to improve case management.

In the interim, there is city lockdown type quarantine until the existing cases become contagious in about 2 to 3 weeks time from January 22nd. it's expensive but it should work. The alternative -- full infection of the population, is a much worse alternative.

Quote from JedRothwell

A week ago, most estimates put the fatality rate below 2%. I think it is considerably lower than that now, because the number of uncounted, non-fatal cases is much higher than previously reported, whereas deaths are usually accounted for. See:

https://www.nytimes.com/intera…-coronavirus-contain.html

Jed, one only knows the CFR after all the cases have recovered. We also don't know the case fatality ratio for the infected who either self treat and recover, or have mortality. Most of the garbage "mortality rates" you see in the media is by uninformed people who are comparing numerators and denominators that are effectively spaced apart by two weeks of disease course, i.e. the 2% rate. And that includes the NYTimes headline writer as well as China government officials to whom it is in their economic interest to make it seem like it is "just the flu". I think the true CFR is in the 5 to 10% range and we will see in 6 months when the virus finishes its course. God speed to the Chinese in their attempt to lower the person to person contact for one virus life cycle. I feel especially for the front line medical care teams that can't go home in a terrible situation with insufficient ICU beds and equipment for the sick. There is one doctor who sounded the alarm back in December who is on a ventilator. I hope/pray he recovers, but even then -- he will be back on the front lines for another 6 to 8 weeks.

Good job Paradigmnoia!

Quote from Paradigmnoia

So today I got new RSR232 cable info ... which disagrees seriously from the manual (page 15).

Now the 3.5 mm jack base is the signal (rather than the tip), there is no RS232 ground connection, and 3.5 mm jack tip goes to a new terminal, neither of which the Rx and Tx wires go to .

wtf

Edit: tested and this works. The user manual is BS.

The Sparkfun RS232 - TTL level shifter (with or without the female DB9 connector) has only circuit board connections to three pins of 9: Tx, Rx, and Ground.

Currently, this only works on a RS232 to USB on a laptop serial monitor but at least I can see the data enough to work out decoding it now.

The revised DB9 wiring utilizes a neat voltage level manipulation circuit but seems odd without a real ground, and so the TTL shifter needs re-wiring, and there a bazillion suggestions on the Internet for tying DB9 pins one way and another with zener diodes to sort through ...

The 3.5 mm jack has the base tied to the cable jacket foil, but will be carrying 5V at the jack tip, unreferenced to the receiving side ground except at the power supplies.

Edit2:

In case someone else runs into this, since it is unusual, the Reed Datalogger uses a DTR asserted signal from the receiving end, normally supplied by a PC DB9 serial port. This is typically a +9 to +12 V positive signal with some very weak current carrying capacity (about 35 mA). This DTR voltage goes up the RS232 adapter cable to the Reed datalogger, where (inside) it connects to the base of a signal transistor. The high logic RS232 signal then comes back out of the datalogger, (using this voltage supply, through the internal transistor), and goes back down the cable to the Tx pin of the adapter cable, and ultimately to the Rx pin of the (RS232) receiving end. (Negative voltage signals are also sent down this same output signal wire, as well as a zero V (neutral) idle signal.)

It seems that this DTR voltage can be high enough, even at +5V, to operate (most of) the RS232 to TTL level shifter/inverter devices typically available. However, a resistor (and possibly a diode) should be installed in series to prevent trouble if wired up wrong somewhere along the way. So, in theory, the DTR line can be supplied (with caution) by the +5V Arduino voltage output, and (with more caution) possibly by an Arduino +5V digital output pin set to high logic. The Tx signal from the datalogger connects to the receiving RS232 Rx pin as usual. The ground wire is not connected to anything on the datalogger end. [This is an output only system, and it is unclear if the DTR signal is being used by the data logger for its intended purpose also. However, it seems technically impossible for the datalogger to send any signal without the voltage supplied by the receiver end DTR +voltage signal.]
(Not all devices connected this way can necessarily use the low +5V at DTR, and may require more voltage, up to +12V, in order to output the RS232 signals properly, especially over any great cable lengths.)

It is still unclear if the RS232 DTR logic low (negative voltage!) is required in this case, but it seems not.

Apparently some anemometers output two wire RS232 using this system.

There are some devices that use the RS232 RTS logic low (negative voltage, as low as -12V) combined with the RS232 DTR logic high (positive voltage) to make a large voltage differential (up to 24V) to supply some circuits.

EDIT3:

Finally the RS232 data comes out other than zeros and a few random other bits. I found a manual for a device using the same base circuit board which has an extra connection.

See B&W image below. Compare this to the WRONG page 15 version of the REED manual. (Ignore some data byte info that are for an anemometer only).

Without the additional 2.2k resistor, basically only zeros (00) are sent to the serial plug.

.

Display More

max "Reglar flu. By late April it will peak with 1.5 -2M infected. With morality rate 2-3 percent.

Well not regular but mediaflu."

No. Regular flue has a Case Fatality Ratio of around 0.1%. nCov-2019 has a rate of around 3 to 10%. (Comparison SARS-Cov 9.6%, but with a much smaller infected population.)

Worse, the nCov-2019 CFR is much higher in individuals over 60 approaching 50% for the elderly.

Additionally, nCov-2019 has a daily growth rate in the 20% area.

Imagine if 5 to 10% of the world's population died of this outbreak. This is nothing like the seasonal flu in the past 50 years. Best wishes for the Chinese on their quarantine experiment in Wuhan. It may need to be repeated in other cities that have large infected populations. We will see in the next 10 days how the quarantine worked. We all wish them well.

Quote from Paradigmnoia

I don’t mind the IDE. For some strange reason it is like there is a separate clipboard for the IDE, so one can cut and paste within the IDE, but try and copy from another page and paste to the IDE and whatever was copied or cut from the IDE last time pastes instead.

Anyways everything was working smoothly until I tried to read the RS232 signal (2 wire only!) from my usual data logger, in order to incorporate that into the sketch data log. I have an RS232 to TTL level shifter, wired everything thing up, checked the Tx and Rx wires end to end, and nothing happens. There should be a 16 bits-long word but nothing comes out in either single bits or strings and with only two wires (Tx and ground), there is no way to poke the RS232 side into action. It is possible that the level shifter doesn’t like only one signal wire. So today’s diagnostics involves plugging in an RS232 to USB cable and seeing if the laptop can see it working...

Or get an old computer circa 1988 with an RS-232 port.

On Booker's report, does anyone have an energy estimate for the H2 + O2 supplied before it hits the Pd catalyst, and any electric or thermal energy added at that point of the experiment. As Bob Greenyer pointed out the energy of atomic H to H2 or H2O must be accounted for to rule that out as the cause of the excess energy in the report.

I read the report yesterday and noted around 950 kJ of excess energy in the runs. Back of the envelope that is about 8 grams of H2 or around 20 grams of gasoline, i.e. less than an ounce; so ruling this chemical energy out is necessary.

Quote from jeff

The vacuum system is put back together. There is now a valve between the forepump and the TM pump to prevent backflow. Right now I am testing just the vacuum system to determine how good a vacuum can be attained. The forepump can easily get down to a few milli Torr in a few minutes. The T/M pump gets down to < 1e-6 Torr after an hour. My suspicion is that the new Viton gaskets in the HV side need to be baked out to reach a lower value. The next step will be to add an RGA to identify which gas species are present and need to be removed. Does anybody have suggestions for a good brand of RGA?

System looks good. A few vacuum points to use:

1) you can have a great TM/backer pump setup, but if you have a long thin pipe going to the experiment's vacuum chamber, it will pump down slow. This is because the few molecules that are left have to bounce around to find the tiny hole, and then the vacuum pipe acts like a piece of resistive wire.

2) You can measure the rate of vacuum increase after closing off the valve to fit your rate of leakage/outgassing by fitting an exponential curve (you can use Excel if that is all you got). This tells you how many moles per second are getting into your closed off rig. You can then compute how much gas can be removed by your turbopump to figure out what the ultimate pressure obtainable should be. You can also estimate how much better vacuum you would get by waiting for the oil/water vapor to come off the inner materials by running the test at successive times and then fitting a curve.

3) Try using a heat gun or running the internal heater to increase the rate of outgassing. You probably want to outgas at the highest temperature that the rig can safely stand, maybe 60 to 70C.

4) An RGA is a good idea for the experiment, but probably not necessary unless you have a leak. I am assuming you don't have the unit currently hooked up to H2 or D2, so that RGA is going to show either air components or water vapor or oil.

5) Mizuno doesn't run his experiments at that high a vacuum (1e-3 Torr is my recollection), so if you can pump down to 1e-4 Torr and keep it there that's probably good enough. You will be able to estimate the rate of air (O2 + N2) getting into the rig from the above test, and I believe you are going to fill the unit when you start with about 2e-3 Torr of H2 or D2 and then valve off. You will be able to calculate from the above how fast the maximum leakage of O2 is into the rig. That leaves a tiny fixed amount of H2 fuel for potential combustion with the atmospheric O2 or reduction of oxidation layers -- you can easily put an upper bound on that energy and prove it is insignificant (i.e. <0.1%) of the energy produced by the rig during your run.

6) The thermal characteristics of 2e-4 H2 or D2 are different than a pure vacuum, but as I believe Pandigmnonia noted, your airflow calorimeter is going to not be effected that much by the change in conduction or convection out your rig (I am guessing less than 2% with a spot guess of 0.5%) so that for a good excess energy run, it won't matter. You can prove that yourself by running a control gas run using an inert stainless steel mesh with H2, or alternatively, run with Helium and then with N2. That would prove the gas conduction/convection doesn't matter.

Good luck.

Quote from Paradigmnoia

I am using an Arduino Mega2560 with an Adafruit data logging shield.
Starting to get the hang of it. I was able to put zeros in front of the time single digits, and work out proper incremental time samples based on Unix ms timing (rather than just a delay). The most annoying part is that stuff copied from off IDE won’t paste into IDE.

If you hate the IDE see if you can program using a conventional text editor like Emacs or VIM and then run the results in a separate console window. If you are running Linux or Mac, I find that most open source IDE tools can copy and paste, but sometimes I have to resort to guerrilla tactics.