I had the pleasure of popping over to Overunity.com. You are still going by George1 there, and your ridiculous tactics aren't convincing anyone that your incorrect assumptions and poorly constructed and incorrect formulas have any merit.
They don't work there. They don't work here. Your made-up formulas do not represent the real world. No-one is buying your scam. No-one takes you seriously. You can't even count correctly.
After reading your posts, I am reminded of this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKjxFJfcrcA
A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater than 1
Moderator: scott
re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t
To Tarsier79 (as well as to all other "Nobel prize candidates:)" here in this forum).
=========================
=========================
=========================
Read carefully the text below!
-----------------------------------
The text below can be found in many of our previous posts. Anyway let us repeat it again.
-----------------------------
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 resisitance.
-----------------------------
And one more interesting fact.
Literally the same solved problem can be found in an old Russian (still from the Soviet times) book "Сборник задач и вопросов по физике", 1986, p. 130, solved example problem 71. The authors of this book are Р. А. Гладкова and Н. И. Кутиловская. 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 resisitance 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.
==================
P.S. Tarsier79, I will call your doctor! I am not joking!:)
=========================
=========================
=========================
Read carefully the text below!
-----------------------------------
The text below can be found in many of our previous posts. Anyway let us repeat it again.
-----------------------------
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 resisitance.
-----------------------------
And one more interesting fact.
Literally the same solved problem can be found in an old Russian (still from the Soviet times) book "Сборник задач и вопросов по физике", 1986, p. 130, solved example problem 71. The authors of this book are Р. А. Гладкова and Н. И. Кутиловская. 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 resisitance 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.
==================
P.S. Tarsier79, I will call your doctor! I am not joking!:)
re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t
To Tarsier79 (as well as to all other "Nobel prize winners:) here in this forum).
=======================
=======================
=======================
Read carefully our previous post!
-----------------------------------------
The key to a successful understanding of our OU concept consists of two consequent steps.
-----------------------------------------
Step 1. Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solved problem. (Look at our previous post.)
-----------------------------------------
Step 2. Our further development of Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution. (Look again at our previous post.)
-----------------------------------------
We start with Step 1.
=======================
STEP 1.
Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution is given below.
Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution consists of two lines only.
LINE 1. Current through the electrolyte is given by I = (m)/(Z x t).
LINE 2. Power consumed = (I) x (I) x (R) = ((m)/(Z x t)) x ((m)/(Z x t)) x (R) = 31.86 W.
=======================
I am asking you (PERSONALLY!) my question for the 1st time: Is Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution correct? Yes or no? Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!
----------------------------------------
All members of this forum are waiting for your PERSONAL(!) answer for the 1st time. Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!
=======================
=======================
=======================
Read carefully our previous post!
-----------------------------------------
The key to a successful understanding of our OU concept consists of two consequent steps.
-----------------------------------------
Step 1. Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solved problem. (Look at our previous post.)
-----------------------------------------
Step 2. Our further development of Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution. (Look again at our previous post.)
-----------------------------------------
We start with Step 1.
=======================
STEP 1.
Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution is given below.
Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution consists of two lines only.
LINE 1. Current through the electrolyte is given by I = (m)/(Z x t).
LINE 2. Power consumed = (I) x (I) x (R) = ((m)/(Z x t)) x ((m)/(Z x t)) x (R) = 31.86 W.
=======================
I am asking you (PERSONALLY!) my question for the 1st time: Is Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution correct? Yes or no? Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!
----------------------------------------
All members of this forum are waiting for your PERSONAL(!) answer for the 1st time. Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!
re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t
Maybe George is a bot. An advanced stupid bot. Anyone seen "Ex Machina"? This could just be an experiment. the test isn't to prove his is smart, it is to fool people he is a real person.
-
eccentrically1
- Addict
- Posts: 3166
- Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 10:25 pm
re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t
To Tarsier79.
---------------------------------------
Hi "Nobel prize winner:)",
1) Stop with these clumsy manipulation tricks! No, George is not a bot. He is a real person and you are a stubborn ignoramus. You reject obvious truths. You have a serious mental problem. You're sick, you have to be cured.
2) Let us focus again on the topic.
STEP 1.
Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution is given below.
Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution consists of two lines only.
LINE 1. Current through the electrolyte is given by I = (m)/(Z x t).
LINE 2. Power consumed = (I) x (I) x (R) = ((m)/(Z x t)) x ((m)/(Z x t)) x (R) = 31.86 W.
=======================
I am asking you (PERSONALLY!) my question for the 2nd time: Is Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution correct? Yes or no? Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!
----------------------------------------
All members of this forum are waiting for your PERSONAL(!) answer for the 2nd time. Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!
---------------------------------------
Hi "Nobel prize winner:)",
1) Stop with these clumsy manipulation tricks! No, George is not a bot. He is a real person and you are a stubborn ignoramus. You reject obvious truths. You have a serious mental problem. You're sick, you have to be cured.
2) Let us focus again on the topic.
STEP 1.
Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution is given below.
Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution consists of two lines only.
LINE 1. Current through the electrolyte is given by I = (m)/(Z x t).
LINE 2. Power consumed = (I) x (I) x (R) = ((m)/(Z x t)) x ((m)/(Z x t)) x (R) = 31.86 W.
=======================
I am asking you (PERSONALLY!) my question for the 2nd time: Is Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution correct? Yes or no? Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!
----------------------------------------
All members of this forum are waiting for your PERSONAL(!) answer for the 2nd time. Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!
re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t
To Tarsier79.
---------------------------------------
STEP 1.
Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution is given below.
Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution consists of two lines only.
LINE 1. Current through the electrolyte is given by I = (m)/(Z x t).
LINE 2. Power consumed = (I) x (I) x (R) = ((m)/(Z x t)) x ((m)/(Z x t)) x (R) = 31.86 W.
=======================
I am asking you (PERSONALLY!) my question for the 3d time: Is Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution correct? Yes or no? Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!
----------------------------------------
All members of this forum are waiting for your PERSONAL(!) answer for the 3rd time. Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!
---------------------------------------
STEP 1.
Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution is given below.
Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution consists of two lines only.
LINE 1. Current through the electrolyte is given by I = (m)/(Z x t).
LINE 2. Power consumed = (I) x (I) x (R) = ((m)/(Z x t)) x ((m)/(Z x t)) x (R) = 31.86 W.
=======================
I am asking you (PERSONALLY!) my question for the 3d time: Is Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution correct? Yes or no? Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!
----------------------------------------
All members of this forum are waiting for your PERSONAL(!) answer for the 3rd time. Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!
re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t
To Tarsier79.
---------------------------------------
STEP 1.
Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution is given below.
Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution consists of two lines only.
LINE 1. Current through the electrolyte is given by I = (m)/(Z x t).
LINE 2. Power consumed = (I) x (I) x (R) = ((m)/(Z x t)) x ((m)/(Z x t)) x (R) = 31.86 W.
=======================
I am asking you (PERSONALLY!) my question for the 4th time: Is Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution correct? Yes or no? Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!
----------------------------------------
All members of this forum are waiting for your PERSONAL(!) answer for the 4th time. Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!
---------------------------------------
STEP 1.
Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution is given below.
Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution consists of two lines only.
LINE 1. Current through the electrolyte is given by I = (m)/(Z x t).
LINE 2. Power consumed = (I) x (I) x (R) = ((m)/(Z x t)) x ((m)/(Z x t)) x (R) = 31.86 W.
=======================
I am asking you (PERSONALLY!) my question for the 4th time: Is Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution correct? Yes or no? Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!
----------------------------------------
All members of this forum are waiting for your PERSONAL(!) answer for the 4th time. Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!
-
Robinhood46
- Devotee
- Posts: 1677
- Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2017 9:22 am
- Location: Lot, France
Re: re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency great
I beg to differ peter.PeterAX wrote: All members of this forum are waiting for your PERSONAL(!) answer for the 3rd time. Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!
I for one, am waiting for you to be actually banned. The number of reddies you have indicate that i am not the only one.
I also think this should be transferred to the "Jokes" thread, because that is what i perceive you to be.
-
eccentrically1
- Addict
- Posts: 3166
- Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 10:25 pm
re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t
To Robinhood46.
--------------------------
1) First of all, on one hand, please excuse me for my repetitions of one and same text 4 times in a row. On the other hand, however, 4 times in a row lack of answer from Tarsier79 (the most aggressive and stubborn sceptic here in this forum) unambiguously shows that he cannot "invent" already any objection against our OU concept. Because if the answer is "yes", then this would be a recognition of the OU effect. And if the answer is "no", then Prof. S.L. Srivastava's solution (as well as all basic axioms of electric engineering) would be smashed to smithereens.
--------------------------
2) I will send again the text but this time the words "All members of this forum are waiting for......." will be replaced by the words "I am waiting for..........". In one word, no member of this forum (except me) is involved in our dispute with Tarsier79.
--------------------------
3) Tarsier79 must be taught a lesson -- not to take part in an electric technology discussion before seriously educating himself in the field of electric engineering.
--------------------------
1) First of all, on one hand, please excuse me for my repetitions of one and same text 4 times in a row. On the other hand, however, 4 times in a row lack of answer from Tarsier79 (the most aggressive and stubborn sceptic here in this forum) unambiguously shows that he cannot "invent" already any objection against our OU concept. Because if the answer is "yes", then this would be a recognition of the OU effect. And if the answer is "no", then Prof. S.L. Srivastava's solution (as well as all basic axioms of electric engineering) would be smashed to smithereens.
--------------------------
2) I will send again the text but this time the words "All members of this forum are waiting for......." will be replaced by the words "I am waiting for..........". In one word, no member of this forum (except me) is involved in our dispute with Tarsier79.
--------------------------
3) Tarsier79 must be taught a lesson -- not to take part in an electric technology discussion before seriously educating himself in the field of electric engineering.
Last edited by PeterAX on Thu Mar 11, 2021 1:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t
To eccentrically1.
-------------------------------
Thanks a lot for the link. Please give me some time to consider it carefully.
-------------------------------
Thanks a lot for the link. Please give me some time to consider it carefully.
re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t
To Tarsier79.
---------------------------------------
STEP 1.
Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution is given below.
Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution consists of two lines only.
LINE 1. Current through the electrolyte is given by I = (m)/(Z x t).
LINE 2. Power consumed = (I) x (I) x (R) = ((m)/(Z x t)) x ((m)/(Z x t)) x (R) = 31.86 W.
=======================
I am asking you (PERSONALLY!) my question for the 5th time: Is Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution correct? Yes or no? Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!
----------------------------------------
I am waiting for your PERSONAL(!) answer for the 5th time. Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!
---------------------------------------
STEP 1.
Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution is given below.
Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution consists of two lines only.
LINE 1. Current through the electrolyte is given by I = (m)/(Z x t).
LINE 2. Power consumed = (I) x (I) x (R) = ((m)/(Z x t)) x ((m)/(Z x t)) x (R) = 31.86 W.
=======================
I am asking you (PERSONALLY!) my question for the 5th time: Is Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution correct? Yes or no? Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!
----------------------------------------
I am waiting for your PERSONAL(!) answer for the 5th time. Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!
re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t
There is no point arguing with a bot or an idiot. You already have my answer.
Believe what you want to believe, or what you are programmed to. You will anyway.
Believe what you want to believe, or what you are programmed to. You will anyway.
re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t
To Tarsier79.
--------------------------------
I do not know who is the idiot here. Because only an idiot is not able to answer a simple question by using only either "yes" or "no".
--------------------------------
STEP 1.
Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution is given below.
Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution consists of two lines only.
LINE 1. Current through the electrolyte is given by I = (m)/(Z x t).
LINE 2. Power consumed = (I) x (I) x (R) = ((m)/(Z x t)) x ((m)/(Z x t)) x (R) = 31.86 W.
=======================
I am asking you (PERSONALLY!) my question for the 6th time: Is Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution correct? Yes or no? Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!
----------------------------------------
I am waiting for your PERSONAL(!) answer for the 6th time. Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!
--------------------------------
I do not know who is the idiot here. Because only an idiot is not able to answer a simple question by using only either "yes" or "no".
--------------------------------
STEP 1.
Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution is given below.
Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution consists of two lines only.
LINE 1. Current through the electrolyte is given by I = (m)/(Z x t).
LINE 2. Power consumed = (I) x (I) x (R) = ((m)/(Z x t)) x ((m)/(Z x t)) x (R) = 31.86 W.
=======================
I am asking you (PERSONALLY!) my question for the 6th time: Is Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution correct? Yes or no? Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!
----------------------------------------
I am waiting for your PERSONAL(!) answer for the 6th time. Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!