<< "The units are fine."
---It seems that you cannot explain the units... For the last time, no they are not correct.
"The difference is in the placement of the decimal point."
---Again, you are showing your ignorance. You say the difference is a decimal point, but you used the two units as if they were interchangable (the same absolute value). 'k/W m-1K-1' is not a valid unit and makes no sense. Do you even know what this stands for? I doubt it.
"I am not worried about defending myself. I know who I am, what my background is and my level of technical expertise. I am only interested in the facts. Nor am I concerned about whether your are a chemical engineer or not, although based on your posts in this thread there are some doubts in my mind about your credentials."
---Why are you so focused on me being a ChE? I've never given information on my industrial experinece. If we add up the time you spend in the subject it seems you are concerned that I'm a ChE. I'm not at all concerned about your 'mind', grow up and get over it.
"Note that I did not put ?Chemical Engineer? in my signature"
---And I do because I am one, and your point is?
"and then make a lot of claims based on hearsay rather than facts. Asking for an ASTM test when you don?t think there is one is a good example. Why the games? What is your agenda? What are you afraid of?"
---You are reapeating what I stated to you and/or Nevin on other ocassions. Don't you realize how transparent you are? You are either an alias of Nevin or a really good friend of his. You are the one making claims without references. I never said there was an ASTM exactly for thermal compounds, you added that. I only wrote 'Let me see ASTM tests performed in an independent lab'. But I do know there's one for thermal conductivity. And this is what we are interested in, is it not? Couldn't you figure that one out? There aren't ASTM methods for products (like thermal compounds). ASTM methods are in place to test specific properties only (ike thermal conductivity, viscosity, etc.). It is obvious your level of 'knowledge' or 'expertise' doesn't amount to much.
Unless you can reference your numbers/claims and explain your units stop wasting our time with your nonsense.
***"It isn't worth fighting a battle of wits with an unarmed man..."*** >>
Perhaps the reason it seems that Nevin and I may have similar ideas is that we may know a bit more about what is really going on than you care to admit. Attacking a product and claming it?s dangerous without adding the disclaimer that it?s when people don?t follow instructions is irresponsible and or reeks of a personal agenda ?---The product is plain dangerous because you can fry your video card with it and that's a fact.? Not only is this irresponsible it borders on a being a libelous statement.
Forgive me for my typing skills, kW/ m-1K-1 is K(1000) watts divided by (meters * 10 to the -1 power) * (degrees Kelvin * 10 to the -1 power) is off by a factor of 10 compared to W/mK. It?s been 20 years since I had to deal with units at this level. At first glance they appeared correct. I should have quoted them as W/mK as the obviously are. I am not a practicing engineer. It has been over 20 years since I went to school to become one and upon leaving school, I pursued a more financially rewarding career in sales, management and manufacturing. Unit booboos aside, this does not change the facts. The thermal conductivity numbers I quoted are still within a few insignificant points of those that both you and Nevin quoted. The proportions and conclusions are still the same. Silver has more than 10 times the thermal conductivity of zinc oxide. Look it up in your Perry's Chemical Engineers' Handbook and post the numbers.
Also please note that I have not tried to twist the facts by suggesting standardized tests that don?t exist be run to resolve the question at hand.