Yaniv

Guys, cut nonsense and get results.

Start with 6 DP balance. I bet your calculations are wrong.

I think the experiment should use the principle of a calorimeter. Place a precision balance and a thermocouple in a vacuum chamber. Heat the vacuum chamber and record how many calories are required to raise the T of the vacuum chamber by say 10 degC and record change in W on balance. Next, place the metal sample on the balance and repeat the heating. The additional calories should tell how many calories were absorbed by the metal and subtraction of W before from W after metal was added should tell W change of the metal.

What power is up to experimentalists who do the experiment.

Electric heater or laser can do the job.

W reduction at increasing T in vacuum, if exists, does not prove my theory right. My theory should be tested by more experiments. But, it does prove traditional physics wrong. #ResultsRequired

If someone do the experiment and find no change in W I could argue from a philosophical point of view that greater precision is required. If however a change in W is observed you have to drop your theory. Increasing T of the metal in vacuum.

No change in W or an increase in W at increasing T in vacuum will falsify my theory. #ResultsRequired

I guess you are not interested to do an experiment to test conservation of mass.

I can't make quantitative predictions before the results. Once you get results, say 1 microgram lost per gram per 1 degC, you can make quantitative predictions.

You come up with all the reasons why not to do a relatively simple experiment. Are you not interested to measure if W changes at increasing T in vacuum to test conservation of mass ?

Use the most precise balance you can find.

My theory came out from my imagination and provides many experimentally testable predictions. No, I am not sure. This is why this experiment should be carried out by proper experimentalists to exclude all possible side effects on weight. And this experiment should be carried out to highest precision measurable with modern instruments.

I think first you should get it right on a qualitative level and later quantify a theory. W reduction at increasing T in vacuum, if exists, disproves the mathematical framework of physics.

My theory predicts W should decrease at increasing T in vacuum and can be found here <link removed by moderator> (Glaser, Metrologia, 1990) used precision balance to measure micrograms changes in weight. In his experiments in air 20 grams metal rod heated by 5 degC lost 100 micrograms. I think this precision may be sufficient to find the missing weight predicted by my theory.

The results of this experiment is missing from the literature so you can't say its wrong or right without the results of the experiment. You are right. I need better argument than opinions. I need results ! Is nobody out there interested to test conservation of mass ?

I did not do the experiment and don't have the skills to do the experiment on my own. I think this experiment should be done by professional experimentalists.

Classical physics predicts weight (W) should NOT change at increasing temperature (T) in vacuum. Relativistic physics predicts W should INCREASE at increasing T in vacuum. My theory predicts W should DECREASE at increasing T in vacuum and can be found here yaniv-stern.webnode.com. W reduction at increasing T in vacuum disproves conservation of mass and most of the rest of #physics. Over the past ten years I contacted thousands of scientists to weigh a heated metal in vacuum and publish the results. I did Not get the results of the experiment. #ResultsRequired

I read TGA curves often require "transformations", modifications", "curve smoothing" and "other operations" before results can be interpreted. So final curves may show what you want and hide what you don't. Rapid weight losses are often explained with evaporation. Do evaporaites account for the entire loss ? could other factors contribute for a fraction of the loss ? To test the missing weight predicted by my theory you got to do the r i g h t experiment.

I am looking for simultaneous TGA/DSC curves of a metal in vacuum. Do you know a reference ?

The truth is the link between temperature and weight has not been thoroughly investigated and further experiments are required. In my theory weight reduction depends on heat particles added to the sample. So in this sense it depends on the energy added to the sample rather than the temperature of the environment.

For years I tried to find scientists to do the experiment. When I was talking about the truth they were talking about unicorns and when I was talking about an experiment they were talking about nobel prizes. Do you now understand why I could not find a scientist to do the experiment ? The balance could know how much weight to add from the temperature. For example, at 50degC add 1mg, at 100degC add 2mg... I think the makers of the balance did not claim a nobel prize because they didn't have a theory to predict a link between temperature and weight. In their scientific mind they see it as noise. I am not an experimentalist. I don't have the skills to set up the apparatus and electronics. This experiment should be carried out by the best experimentalists on the globe.

To distinguish between effects of temperature on balance and on sample I would heat the chamber without a sample and tell the computer this amount of change is noise, remember and correct before display every time when running the program. When a sample is heated any additional deviations from "no sample" to be displayed. I have a couple of papers, not great and with some problems, but showing that temperature has an effect on weight. You don't have any paper showing weight does not change at increasing temperatures. Thermogravimetric graphs showing no or mild decline over a range of temperatures could be explained with insulators, materials that reflect rather than absorb heat. Glaser thinks air-related factors contribute to the entire change in weight. He can not make this claim without showing in vacuum weight does not change at all. Dmitriev thinks temperature decreases rate of fall. I told you in my theory rate of fall should not change. You seem to come up with all the reasons in the world why NOT to do the experiment. I understand why. All of science is hunging on a few micrograms. A good scientist though will get on with the experiment.

The evidence for an effect of temperature on weight comes from Glaser and Dmitriev papers. Don't know how you missed it. Dmitriev et al who work in the field of precision measurements had reasons to speculate that temperature has an effect on weight. What are the reasons ? Why his results were ignored and not addressed by the scientific community ? The graph you provided me show changes in weight of a sample. This is what you want from the machine, only weight of the sample. You don't want the machine to show temperature-dependent changes considered as noise. If I was the manufacturer I would correct noise before display to show only changes in weight of the sample. If I was the consumer I would also like a simple display with noise corrected. Are you sure the final graph is not being modified in any way before display ? If you are not going to look for the missing weight predicted by my theory you will never find it. According to science it is not there.

I have just spent a few hours more looking for thermogravimetric results showing weight of heated metals does not change at increasing temperatures. Sorry, can't find it. Can you please help ?