Just wanted to say hi and to expound some thoughts. There does not seem to be a general discussion forum so I will post my comments here.

Firstly about me.

I am sceptical about LENR. was gung ho a while back but not so any more. Still I am hopeful and therefore continue to follow the subject.

I am impressed with your efforts. keep it up. I hope for you and the world at large you are successful.

Please excuse any misconceptions in the following. I would like to say I have a deep grasp of your experimentation, but I don't. just that of a casual but interested observer.

Now to my pondering...

As I understand it Celani's Wire is specially treated constantan that creates microstructures or flaws in the metal.
Even though Celani uses constantan as the metal and one of its properties is stable resistance. The introduction of micro fractures will alter that substantially. you can no longer rely on the stability of the wire (this is true regardless of the actual type of wire used).

Depending on the mechanics you may find the wires resistance increases or decreases as the fractures open and close under the influence of heating. a nominal increase in the resistance in a localised position on the wire may result in overheating and possibly failure at that point. You could not for example consider such an event as a nuclear event, it could simply be localised overheating.

Even when the power is precisely controlled you could not rely on that being distributed evenly across the wire.

Using spot temperature sensors in the circumstances described above will be very inaccurate, even using the thermal imaging may not show localised heating if its say hidden from view by the mica support structure.

As temperature is not directly related to power I believe it it is difficult or impossible to draw conclusions from any of the test runs as currently configured.

Please excuse any misconceptions in the above.

CC

Nothing wrong with a little questioning. The micro-structure of the constantan wire would to be the source of the effect. Iron-constantan themrocouples have been used for decades in all kinds of chemically challenging environments. If the LENR effect was obvious, it would have been accidentally discovered decades ago when unexplained temperatures and energy relaease started being reported. However, there is a tendency to repeat experiments when anomolous results are obtained. This means getting new thermocouples and sensors before the experimental rerun begins. Any special aging effects can thus be removed, and the expected results can then be obtained. Sometimes being focused on the results, hides the really important stuff growing in the weeds.
The LENR reproduction experiment is configured as single channel calorimeter. The measurements of temperature all interact. All of the measurements arre part of a third or fourth order differential equation. As the ambient temperature changes, all the other temperatures in the system change. I haven't seen an official model of the system yet. I'll try to give you my version, but I have not been able to download files yet. Maybe this time.
My model says we should operate with power only supplied to the inactive heater wire. Since in an inactive sytstem (no other energy sources) this is the olny source of heat. The temperature of the heat source (the heater wire) will always be higher, or nearly equal to the temperature of any other wires in the experiment. Thus, when only the heater wire is powered, it will be the hottest point in the system. Only when the LENR wire generates power will the temperature of the LENR wire exceed the temperature of the heater wire. A hot LENR wire validates the effect. This observation does not help predict the acutal power output, but rather the presence of the desired LENR effect. I think this would be unequivocal confirmation of a real effect.

jdk

p.s. The" Add file" button is not working. My system: Linuxmint 64 bit, google chrome. The "Attachments" text box is dead.

Chris,
That was my understanding of Constantan wire as well. It's not what I've seen on the graphs of the data during testing. I guess I didn't realize that it was supposed to be the treatment of the wire that seemed to cause the resistance to chance with temperature. I just thought that the very small resistance change was common to all Constantan wire but that the deviation of the value was very little over a large range in temperature but linear. I couldn't really find that during my searches on the internet though.

Hi RonB, JDK

JDK I am only going on reading between the lines. but I think that the effect may not be an effect of heat alone. Having an external heating source or wire may work. But I think its important that Celani was only able to get the effect while running current through the wire.

Therefore the effect may be as dependent on charge migration as temperature. removing current from the wire may just render a bar heater and nothing else.

Celani was going to try and create a self sustaining reaction by heating the wire externally. as yet I have heard nothing on whether there has been any progress there.


RonB Yes that is the nature of Constantan. very little deviation in resistance over a large temperature range. but structurally unsound Constantan would not be reliable in that way any more.

Resistance has a relationship to the material type, the length of the wire and the cross sectional area of the wire (for DC), but Celanis wire has a cross sectional area which deviates across its length by virtue of the microfractures. so its resistance varies from point to point and will change depending on its temp. and may also change as a factor of h2 loading.