A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater than 1

A Bessler, gravity, free-energy free-for-all. Registered users can upload files, conduct polls, and more...

Moderator: scott

Post Reply
User avatar
ME
Addict
Addict
Posts: 3512
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:37 pm
Location: Netherlands

re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t

Post by ME »

Tarsier79 wrote:
Do you accept the simple obvious fact that the two related equalities
V = I x R <=> V x I x t = I x I x R x t are perfectly valid for any solid, liquid or gaseous conductor?
So, replace "<=>" with "Therefor"? Then you quote a power formula twice.

Then, is it valid for....... Yes. It is valid for the input side of the equation.
The "<=>" is more like an "If-and-only-if".
That makes makes that expression true. "Therefor" works too though.
I thought this was already covered and generally accepted a couple of pages earlier and distracts from that additional stuff.
Marchello E.
-- May the force lift you up. In case it doesn't, try something else.---
User avatar
Tarsier79
Addict
Addict
Posts: 5139
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 2:17 am
Location: Qld, Australia

re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t

Post by Tarsier79 »

George, I think the reason you keep going back to the first page of the textbook is due to your lack of complex reasoning, which requires at least some understanding.

ME, I agree. We don't need to keep going over the basics. This latest mathematical statement is the reason the rest of his formulas are complete rubbish.

I think my previous statement still stands. George, prove your theory with scientific method. Without proof, your theories are just those of a raving lunatic.
George1
Aficionado
Aficionado
Posts: 383
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2018 1:40 pm

re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t

Post by George1 »

We are talking solely and only about standard DC water-splitting electrolysis process.
---------------------------------------------------
Whatever experiments to do you actually measure constant voltage V, constant direct current I, constant Ohmic resistance R and time t. The real experimental values of V, I, R and t would give three simple mathematical expressions:
1) V = I x R. This is Ohm's law.
2) V x I x t = I x I x R x t. This is the first Joule's law.
3) V x I x t < (I x I x R x t) + (Z x I x t x (HHV)). This is the OU property of any standard DC water-splitting electrolysis process.
----------------------------------------------------
Simple, clear and understandable. And anyone, who tries to reject this simple obvious truth, is either a clumsy and unskillful manipulator and/or a person, who has some severe mental problems.




&#1054;&#1090;&#1075;&#1086;&#1074;&#1086;&#1088;
&#1055;&#1088;&#1077;&#1087;&#1088;&#1072;&#1097;&#1072;&#1085;&#1077;
User avatar
Tarsier79
Addict
Addict
Posts: 5139
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 2:17 am
Location: Qld, Australia

re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t

Post by Tarsier79 »

1. Agreed
2. Sure
3. No.

Your formula is baseless and ill conceived.

Your experiment has to measure heat, hydrogen, oxygen and any other chemical process that occurs to be complete. If you measure just the hydrogen and oxygen, someone skilled in chemistry can calculate the other related reactions.

Even measuring the hydrogen produced will have some challenges. As I said earlier, I have been there, done that.
George1
Aficionado
Aficionado
Posts: 383
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2018 1:40 pm

re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t

Post by George1 »

The text below can be found in many of our previous posts. Anyway let us repeat it again for those, who understand simple things with great difficulty.
-----------------------------
Have a look again at the book "Solved Problems in Physics", 2004, Volume 2, p. 876, solved problem 12.97. The author of this book is Prof. S. L. Srivastava (Ph.D.)
The same book can be found at the link https://books.google.bg/books?id=rrKFzL ... 22&f=false
--------------------------
For your convenience I am giving below the text of the problem and its solution.
--------------------------
12.97. In the electrolysis of sulphuric acid solution, 100 mg of hydrogen is liberated in a period of 20 minutes. The resistance of the electrolyte is 0.5 Ohm. Calculate the power consumed. Electrochemical equivalent of hydrogen is 1.044 x 10 -8 kg/C.
Solution: The power consumed is equal to 31.86 W.
Prof. S. L. Srivastava stops here his calculations.
(The related solution's set of equations is not given here in order to save time and space. This set of equations however can be found in the book or in the link above.)
--------------------------
WE DEVELOPED FURTHER PROF. SRIVASTAVA'S SOLVED PROBLEM IN A NON-STANDARD MANNER.
OUR FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF PROF. SRIVASTAVA'S SOLVED PROBLEM LED TO COP > 1.
HERE IS THE ESSENCE OF OUR APPROACH.
--------------------------
1) Let us calculate the inlet energy, that is, inlet energy = (31.86 W) x (1200 s) = 38232 Ws = 38232 J.
2) Let us calculate the current I. The current I is given by I = (m)/(Z x t) = 7.9 A,
where
m = 0.0001kg of hydrogen
Z = electrochemical equivalent of hydrogen
t = 1200 s
3) The Joule's heat, generated in the process of electrolysis is given by
Q = I x I x R x t = (7.9 A) x (7.9 A) x (0.5 Ohm) x (1200 s) = 37446 J = outlet energy 1.
4) HHV of hydrogen is 142 000 000 J/kg. Therefore the heat H, generated by burning/exploding of 0.0001 kg of hydrogen, is given by
H = (142 000 000) x (0.0001) = 14200 J = outlet energy 2.
5) Therefore we can write down the equalities:
5A) outlet energy 1 + outlet energy 2 = 37446 J + 14200 J = 51646 J
5B) inlet energy = 38232 J.
6) Therefore COP is given by
COP = 51646 J/38232 J = 1.35 <=> COP = 1.35 <=> COP > 1.
------------------------------
Constant pure water and cooling agent supply could keep constant the electrolyte's temperature, heat exchange, mass and ohmic resistance, respectively.
Besides 0.0001 kg of hydrogen (and the related amount of the already split pure water) is small enough and can be neglected as a factor influencing the electrolyte's temperature, mass and ohmic resistance.
-----------------------------
And one more interesting fact.
Literally the same solved problem can be found in an old Russian (still from the Soviet times) book "&#1057;&#1073;&#1086;&#1088;&#1085;&#1080;&#1082; &#1079;&#1072;&#1076;&#1072;&#1095; &#1080; &#1074;&#1086;&#1087;&#1088;&#1086;&#1089;&#1086;&#1074; &#1087;&#1086; &#1092;&#1080;&#1079;&#1080;&#1082;&#1077;", 1986, p. 130, solved example problem 71. The authors of this book are &#1056;. &#1040;. &#1043;&#1083;&#1072;&#1076;&#1082;&#1086;&#1074;&#1072; and &#1053;. &#1048;. &#1050;&#1091;&#1090;&#1080;&#1083;&#1086;&#1074;&#1089;&#1082;&#1072;&#1103;. In the Russian version the data is a little different, that is, time is 25 minutes, the amount of generated hydrogen is 150 mg, Ohmic resistance is 0.4 Ohm and the calculated power is 37 W.
Russians also stopped their calculations at 37 W.
Our further development of the Russian version led to COP = 1.37, that is, we have again COP > 1.
-----------------------------
Therefore the text above unambiguously shows that it is a matter of exact experimental data which is in perfect accordance with theory. Because I cannot imagine that three highly qualified experts in physics (yet strongly separated by time, space and nationality) would have made one and same mistake three times in a row. This is impossible!"
-----------------------------
IF YOU REJECT THE VALIDITY OF THE TEXT ABOVE, THEN YOU REALLY HAVE SOME MENTAL PROBLEMS! AND YOU HAVE TO SEE YOUR DOCTOR!
George1
Aficionado
Aficionado
Posts: 383
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2018 1:40 pm

re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t

Post by George1 »

Some careful analysis unambiguously show that the agents, who are in the pay of the official science mafia in this forum, use 6 clumsy and unskillful manipulation methods for rejecting of obvious truths. And these 6 methods are as follows.
-----------------------------------------
1) Simulation of ignorance and/or lack of understanding.
2) Distorting of our words.
3) Writing of long texts, full of semi-truths, absurd hypotheses and deliberately hidden theoretical/mathematical errors.
4) Writing of long texts, which have nothing to do with the discussed topic.
5) Direct ridiculous rejecting of obvious truths by using phrases like " This is impossible, because it is impossible and that's all!" and other similar howlers.
6) Various combinations of the above five,
-----------------------------------------
Our appeal is: Please do not fall under the influence of this forum's clumsy manipulators! These unworthy people are not seeking for the truth! They simply want to earn some money!
User avatar
Tarsier79
Addict
Addict
Posts: 5139
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 2:17 am
Location: Qld, Australia

re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t

Post by Tarsier79 »

Science mafia! Ha ha.

Arrogant george, I hope you see your own flaws one day.

Accusing me and ME of not explaining our arguments?

Look back and see who has the excessive length posts. I don't even read half of them any more.

"If you don't agree with my logic then you have mental problems"...That is a great argument.

Your formula and your logic have been proven in detail to be the imaginings of a basement dwelling imbecile. You refuse to address any well formed argument that you are unable to counter argue... which seems to be nearly all of them, and you keep reverting back to your original poorly advised logic.

Keep it up. It seems to be working. You have nearly convinced me to mortgage my home and give you the money.
User avatar
MrTim
Aficionado
Aficionado
Posts: 924
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2003 11:05 pm
Location: "Excellent!" Besslerwheel.com's C. Montgomery Burns
Contact:

re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t

Post by MrTim »

WE DEVELOPED FURTHER PROF. SRIVASTAVA'S SOLVED PROBLEM IN A NON-STANDARD MANNER.
So you bastardized his solution to make it fit your needs? Does he know you did this? Does he agree with your findings?

To those late to this 'discussion', please read my comments on page 13 of this topic. It reveals that the Emperor George1's "efficient heater" has no clothes... ;-)
"....the mechanism is so simple that even a wheel may be too small to contain it...."
"Sometimes the harder you look the better it hides." - Dilbert's garbageman
User avatar
ME
Addict
Addict
Posts: 3512
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:37 pm
Location: Netherlands

re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t

Post by ME »

Name-calling always signals a total lack of on-topic arguments.

One could spend some time accusing people for whatever, like being part of some "Science Mafia" or, let's see, being "clumsy", or "reject obvious truths"...
...even in the unrelated case when that might be so, how is that supposed to really help the initial idea?
As announced on page 20, I leave it up to others to provide help because it seriously hurts him too much when I, and others, try. Or basically anyone who tries.
George1 wrote:Our appeal is: Please do not fall under the influence of this forum's clumsy manipulators! These unworthy people are not seeking for the truth! They simply want to earn some money!
The calling is as the caller does.
I wonder, who literally asked for actual millions of dollars?
MrTim wrote:It reveals that the Emperor George1's "efficient heater" has no clothes... ;-)
Poor George.
Tarsier79 wrote:You have nearly convinced me to mortgage my home and give you the money.
We all know that the obvious scientific truth is: You are not that clumsy!
Marchello E.
-- May the force lift you up. In case it doesn't, try something else.---
George1
Aficionado
Aficionado
Posts: 383
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2018 1:40 pm

re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t

Post by George1 »

Read very, very, very carefully again our last post of Sun Jan 03, 2021 3:07 pm.
-------------------------------------------------
Here is Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution:
Current through the electrolyte is given by I = (m)/(Z x t).
Power consumed = (I) x (I) x (R) =  ((m)/(Z x t)) x ((m)/(Z x t)) x (R) = 31.86 W.
-------------------------------------------------
It is absolutely evident from Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution (a) that each second the electrolyte (the liquid conductor) consumes 31.86 J of electric energy and (b) that each second the electrolyte (the liquid conductor) generates 31.86 J of Joule's heat. Do you accept this simple obvious truth? Do you accept Prof. S. L. Srivastava's (and his two Russian colleagues' some 40 years ago) solution? Yes or no?
Last edited by George1 on Mon Jan 04, 2021 1:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
George1
Aficionado
Aficionado
Posts: 383
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2018 1:40 pm

re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t

Post by George1 »

Read very, very, very carefully again our last post of Sun Jan 03, 2021 3:07 pm.
-------------------------------------------------
Here is Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution:
Current through the electrolyte is given by I = (m)/(Z x t).
Power consumed = (I) x (I) x (R) = ((m)/(Z x t)) x ((m)/(Z x t)) x (R) = 31.86 W.
-------------------------------------------------
It is absolutely evident from Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution (a) that each second the electrolyte (the liquid conductor) consumes 31.86 J of electric energy and (b) that each second the electrolyte (the liquid conductor) generates 31.86 J of Joule's heat. Do you accept this simple obvious truth? Do you accept Prof. S. L. Srivastava's (and his two Russian colleagues' some 40 years ago) solution? Yes or no?
User avatar
Tarsier79
Addict
Addict
Posts: 5139
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 2:17 am
Location: Qld, Australia

re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t

Post by Tarsier79 »

I accept nothing. I did not do the experiment. I did not see the experiment. I did not measure the outcome of the experiment. I did not calibrate the meassuring equipment. I did not read the experiment, nor am I inclined to do so.
George1
Aficionado
Aficionado
Posts: 383
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2018 1:40 pm

re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t

Post by George1 »

To Tarsier79.
---------------------------------
1) Let me remind you again (how many times must we repeat one and same things!) that we are talking only about a theoretical research.
2) So anyway let us slightly modify the question in your favour. The modified question is: Do you have any THEORETICAL (ONLY THEORETICAL!) objections against Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution? Yes or no?
George1
Aficionado
Aficionado
Posts: 383
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2018 1:40 pm

re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t

Post by George1 »

Does any member of this forum have any THEORETICAL (ONLY THEORETICAL!) objections against Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution? Yes or no?
George1
Aficionado
Aficionado
Posts: 383
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2018 1:40 pm

re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t

Post by George1 »

Do you have any THEORETICAL (ONLY THEORETICAL!) objections against Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution? Yes or no?
Post Reply