Quote from: Magluvin on May 10, 2012, 07:02:10 PM
Tk

You are using mineral oil, not water?  From what I remember, water has quite a bit of resistance to taking on heat and getting rid of it compared to some other fluids.

Does the mineral oil heat up and dissipate at the same rate as water? Doing the same experiments side by side, 1 water and the other oil, would the temperatures of each rise and fall the same, in time?

Mags

The specific heat of water is 4.18 Joules per gram per degree C. The specific heat of mineral oil is 1.67 Joules per gram per degree, and the specific gravity of mineral oil is 0.83 grams per milliLiter, and there are 250 milliLiters of mineral oil in there _precisely_ . And I have posted this information several times before, but thanks for asking.

Side by side.... yes, the temperatures would rise and fall in synch. But the values of the temperatures at each instant would differ, because it takes more energy... about 2.5 times as much... to raise one gram of water by one degree than it does to raise one gram of mineral oil by one degree. Therefore, all other things being equal, if you simply multiplied the mineral oil time-temp curve values by (4.18/1.67) and (1/0.83) -- that is, scaling by the ratio of the specific heats and the densities -- you should get the water curve values, fairly closely.
Shouldn't you?

Now.... how many millLiters of water were there in Ainslie's report? How long was it heated, what was the starting temperature and the final temperature, what was the temperature when the element was finally immersed, why isn't there vigorous boiling if the temperature of the water is 104 degrees?

Look at her blog posts 117 and 118 where she is reporting in real time, and then compare to what it has grown to over the last year.

http://newlightondarkenergy.blogspot.com/2011/05/117-this-test-took-water-to-boil-with.html

(Oh yes... there is a certain definite advantage to using mineral oil instead of water, and that should be obvious to anyone who wants to submerge a stack of power resistors in a liquid.)

Guys, just to alert you to the 'spin' - as ever and in answer to this FIRST point of TK's earlier post....

Quote from: TinselKoala on May 10, 2012, 12:52:47 PM
1. Where have I ever claimed to have a degree in electrical engineering? Two days ago she said I was a psychologist. Polly Parrot is flailing around again.

Our little TK's 'bluff and blunder' included the following statement posted as recently as two days ago. 

Quote from: TinselKoala on May 09, 2012, 11:26:36 AMPersonally, I have sat through many many hours of classroom instruction in the topics we are discussing, sat exams, passed them with honors, and I have degrees that call me a scientist, and my job title includes "scientist" in it. In other words, I am credentialed, and these credentials are from MAJOR research universities in the USA.

NOTA BENE.  he has sat through classroom instruction in these topics.  The topic under discussion was 'how to determine dissipated or delivered energy from a switched circuit?'  He then claims that he 'sat exams' on PRECISELY this subject.  And 'passed them with honours'.  And then he states not only that he is CREDENTIALED but that he has DEGREES -  ie more than 1? - from RESEARCH universities? (God alone know why he makes that distinction.  They're all dedicated to research ... I'd have thought.  LOL) In any event the gist of this post is CLEAR and UNEQUIVOCAL.  He's claiming credentialed knowledge of power engineering to the level of honours.  And he draws the distinction that I by contrast am nothing more than a 'high school drop out'.  This is patently untrue - easily disprovable and yet ANOTHER example of SLANDER - which is stated here...

Quote from: TinselKoala on May 09, 2012, 11:26:36 AM
YOU have not got the prerequisite education to understand the concepts you are trying to discuss, this is evident DAILY in something or other that you say, and reading popular books like "Dancing Wu Li Masters" does not a physics education make.

Effectively therefore he is stating that UNLESS one has the required credentials then one is NOT qualified to comment.  BUT - the hell of it is this.  His own flaunted lack of appropriate knowledge is grossly evident.  He's confusions manifold - as scheduled hereunder - and with it an amateurish level of electrical engineering that even surpasses my own.
.  He assumes a MOSFET is a mosfet
.  He refers to a CSR as a CVR
.  He computes resistance without reference to frequency and resulting impedance
.  He claims he can calibrate his instruments with reference to other uncalibrated instruments
.  He uses nominally inductive loads in his 'flaunted' efforts to replicate our own NERD circuit apparatus
.  He gives us videos - time out of mind - where it is IMPOSSIBLE to validate his multiple reference points which is utterly unprofessional
.  He claims results without ever giving a CLEAR AND UNAMBIGUOUS schedule of those results which is utterly unprofessional
.  He concludes without giving a clear argument to support his conclusions which is utterly unprofessional
   And then the doozy
.  He ALSO now claims that you can 'infer' a wattage value from an incomplete sample range of voltage on a switching circuit

I trust that this answers his first question of this post.  I'll deal with the balance of those questions in due course.
It seems that his new name for me is Polly Parrot?  And again, guys NOTA BENE - quite apart from the disgusting level of rudeness associated with this term - is HARTI's ENDORSEMENT of this traducement.  He does NOTHING to prevent it.  Indeed - from appearances it seems that he is - rather - ACTIVELY encouraging it.  THAT is what should be of primary concern in this whole exercise.  What TK chooses to allege and infer and imply and the names he uses for me - are inconsequential - in comparison.

Kindest regards
Rosemary

SO Leon,

Does that answer your first question?

Quote from: TinselKoala on May 10, 2012, 12:52:47 PM
1. Where have I ever claimed to have a degree in electrical engineering? Two days ago she said I was a psychologist. Polly Parrot is flailing around again.

If not I can always repost it.

Rosie Pose

So guys, moving on to the next question...

Quote from: TinselKoala on May 10, 2012, 12:52:47 PM
2. I have made no errors in my calculations. Nowhere did I ever say or imply that 20 watts was dissipated at the load resistor in the case we are discussing, and everybody but the hallucinating parrot knows that. I CALCULATED THE PROPER DISSIPATION AT THE LOAD RESISTOR WHEN THIS ALL STARTED, and SINCE I WAS DISCUSSING ONLY THE ON TIME THE DUTY CYCLE DOES NOT ENTER INTO THE PICTURE.

There is no way under God's sun that you can compute, infer, or imply an instantaneous wattage value on a switched circuit.  If the sample range chosen is NOT representative - then the wattage computation is NOT correct.  I have explained this.  Ad nauseum.  But again.  A wattage value is a unit of POWER.  It doesn't make a blind bit of difference if the wattage refers to power delivered or power dissipated.  It is still power.  Or energy.  And to evaluate the level of that energy one needs to factor in the time during which that energy was manifest.  Again.  IF that wattage was based on a continual DC or AC current flow - then we would have a 'fair' representation of the power delivered or dissipated.  IT is NOT a continual DC OR AC current flow.  it is based on a discontinued 'pulse' applied at regular intervals of 12.5% of each switched cycle.  It's NOT representative therefore of the energy dissipated or delivered or anything at all. It is quite simply WRONG.

And guys - NOTA BENE.  Now not only am I Polly Parrot - but I'm an hallucinating parrot.  And STILL Harti does nothing.  And STILL we're meant to believe that he's promoting a reasonable discussion in the interests of studying new energy sources.  One cannot 'duck' that PREFERRED editorial bias.

Again,
Rosemary

And still moving on... to this next statement...

Quote from: TinselKoala on May 10, 2012, 12:52:47 PM
3. Polly Parrot THINKS that I did not "factor in" impedance. She is LYING YET AGAIN. Probably she cannot figure out how to download and open the SPREADSHEET where all my calculations and data are GIVEN for inspection by ANYONE, which I have linked several times. Where is Polly's comprehensive treatment of inductive reactance? Nowhere.

INDEED.  I have NOT seen these spreadsheets.  Give us a link.  It would be appreciated.

Quote from: TinselKoala on May 10, 2012, 12:52:47 PM4. When does DC become DC? For 16 milliseconds out of every approx. 125 millisecond period, the circuit is passing a DC current of 320 mA at 62 volts from the battery. FOR THAT 16 milliseconds of each period, DC current flows, inductance doesn't matter, and 16 milliseconds is a long time. What is the average DC power during those 16 milliseconds?

The average current flow is possibly 320 mA.  The product of that and the voltage is NOT representative of the watts.  Again.  You cannot compute wattage from an isolated non-representative sample range within a switched cycle.  To get the actual WATTAGE you need to include the full duty cycle.  The DC power delivered during 16 milliseconds CANNOT be averaged over 16 milliseconds if you're hoping to represent that value in units of watts.  I've explained this.  Your best efforts here are WRONG.  AND you are misinforming our members on this - Magsy being just one of them.

Rosie Pose.