Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding

User Menu

Custom Search

Author Topic: KARPEN PILE  (Read 230964 times)

pomodoro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 720
Re: KARPEN PILE
« Reply #555 on: August 22, 2014, 09:00:05 AM »
After 24 hours I unshorted the cell and saw what you will see in video hg.mp4

I stirred the magnetic stirrer for a while but there was no change.

Then I increased the hydrogen flow and got the result  hg2.mp4.



pomodoro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 720
Re: KARPEN PILE
« Reply #556 on: August 22, 2014, 09:51:00 AM »
And for a few days I will leave a shiny Pt electrode just above the mercury.

The volts is between the new Pt and the mercury.  I expected this new electrode to be closer in potential to that of the mercury, so far (early days) it is even more negative than the Pd/Pt up on top.

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: KARPEN PILE
« Reply #557 on: August 22, 2014, 09:52:20 AM »
Ok pomodoro.now leave that cell alone to rest 2 hours in order to re-equilibriate.I can see (as expected) that that voltage wants to climb allllll way back up.don't stir it,don't touch it,just get reading

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: KARPEN PILE
« Reply #558 on: August 22, 2014, 10:11:47 AM »
Why did you jump the experiment pomodoro? It was indicative of success.

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: KARPEN PILE
« Reply #559 on: August 22, 2014, 10:14:00 AM »
You jump too quickly between experiments brother.before conclusions can b drawn!

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: KARPEN PILE
« Reply #560 on: August 22, 2014, 10:21:37 AM »
After 24 hours I unshorted the cell and saw what you will see in video hg.mp4

I stirred the magnetic stirrer for a while but there was no change.

Then I increased the hydrogen flow and got the result  hg2.mp4.
That is quite a difference.

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: KARPEN PILE
« Reply #561 on: August 22, 2014, 10:29:42 AM »
Yeah its a difference mark E.it indicates that the increased vigour of bubbling shortened the time-span of palladium resaturation.in other words there was no saturation at the Hg cathode!!! Pomodoro shouldn't jump experiments,confusing.

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: KARPEN PILE
« Reply #562 on: August 22, 2014, 10:35:06 AM »
My highschool science teacher wouldve beaten me up if I jumped experiments like that prior to conclusion.

pomodoro

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 720
Re: KARPEN PILE
« Reply #563 on: August 22, 2014, 10:47:36 AM »
Not jumping at all, I just added an electrode near the merury. Nothing changed.  Want to see if the Pt changes voltage to near the Hg one. Current from the Hg is too tiny to be practical, but at least there is a large  voltage there.  I still have some hydrogen left.

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: KARPEN PILE
« Reply #564 on: August 22, 2014, 11:00:40 AM »
Yeah its a difference mark E.it indicates that the increased vigour of bubbling shortened the time-span of palladium resaturation.in other words there was no saturation at the Hg cathode!!! Pomodoro shouldn't jump experiments,confusing.
You could have always written out a proposed protocol at the beginning of the tests or anytime along the way.  It's a bit late to start negotiating test protocol.

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: KARPEN PILE
« Reply #565 on: August 22, 2014, 11:02:47 AM »
Not jumping pomodoro?You had to open the thing up and expose it to air correct? My teacher wouldve murdered me.the climbing rate of that voltage after 24hrs short-circuit was about 0.001v/second and was exceptionally likely to accellerate its climb over time.

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: KARPEN PILE
« Reply #566 on: August 22, 2014, 11:14:50 AM »
The palladium/mercury experiment is therefore deemed by me to be a total success.the palladium has to be higher up just its corner touching the top of electrolyte for even greater voltage disparity and far more rapid voltage climb due to shorter resaturation timespan.

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: KARPEN PILE
« Reply #567 on: August 22, 2014, 11:46:24 AM »
The palladium/mercury experiment is therefore deemed by me to be a total success.the palladium has to be higher up just its corner touching the top of electrolyte for even greater voltage disparity and far more rapid voltage climb due to shorter resaturation timespan.
In that case I suggest that you write out your hypothesis, and then state how the experiment falsifies the null, or is at least consistent with the hypothesis proper.

profitis

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3952
Re: KARPEN PILE
« Reply #568 on: August 22, 2014, 12:07:12 PM »
Its very simple @mark E.the stirring/agitation ontop the mercury had no effect to accellerate volts climb after 24hr short.the increased bubbling agitation over the palladium obviously decreased saturation time,that's the time we were supposed to wait out in this experiment.that's where pomodoro went wrong ie.interference with the timespan for resaturation.the voltage climb directly after 24hr hour short was indicative of what was going to be revealed after 2 or 3 hours rest.total success in line with reversable hydrogen spillover theory, in line with nernst theorem, in line with overpotential theorem.   

MarkE

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6830
Re: KARPEN PILE
« Reply #569 on: August 22, 2014, 12:19:35 PM »
Profitis:  I am not asking that you write a narrative to me.  I am suggesting that if you believe that the experiments support your ideas that you state  your hypothesis that you believe the experiments addressed, and then show preferably that the experiments falsified the null, or in the least that they support the hypothesis proper.