A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater than 1
Moderator: scott
re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t
Isn't there at least one brave member here in this forum who would dare to say that any standard water-splitting electrolyzer is a device, which has COP greater than 1? We (our team) are really surprised.
re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t
Any standard water-splitting electrolyzer has a COP, which is bigger than 1. Why don't you accept this simple truth?
-
Georg Künstler
- Devotee
- Posts: 1718
- Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 12:22 pm
- Location: Speyer, Germany
- Contact:
re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t
Hi PeterAX,
do you know from where you get this additional energy ?
Can you detect HE, Helium ?
If yes, then you have your energy source, you make an transmutation.
Changing 1 kg H to 1 kg HE will free the energy equivalent of 21 000 000 tons of hard coal.
So you have your additional energy source.
I can only warn for this kind of energy release, because it is heating up our planet more and more on the surface.
Your temporary advantage is the disadvantage for all the others.
I had suggested you how to do it right with the thread puig roig which I had prepared for you a long time ago.
https://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/view ... light=puig
do you know from where you get this additional energy ?
Can you detect HE, Helium ?
If yes, then you have your energy source, you make an transmutation.
Changing 1 kg H to 1 kg HE will free the energy equivalent of 21 000 000 tons of hard coal.
So you have your additional energy source.
I can only warn for this kind of energy release, because it is heating up our planet more and more on the surface.
Your temporary advantage is the disadvantage for all the others.
I had suggested you how to do it right with the thread puig roig which I had prepared for you a long time ago.
https://www.besslerwheel.com/forum/view ... light=puig
Best regards
Georg
Georg
re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t
To Georg Kunstler.
--------------------------
1) With all my respect to you, dear colleague, but you are not an expert in electric engineering. And that's why I would not like to agree with you because of many reasons.
2) Why don't you focus on the zigzags? You are an extremely skillful master. Why don't you carry out the experiments described in the zigzag topic?
--------------------------
Looking forward to your answer.
--------------------------
1) With all my respect to you, dear colleague, but you are not an expert in electric engineering. And that's why I would not like to agree with you because of many reasons.
2) Why don't you focus on the zigzags? You are an extremely skillful master. Why don't you carry out the experiments described in the zigzag topic?
--------------------------
Looking forward to your answer.
re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t
Any standard water-splitting electrolyzer has a COP, which is bigger than 1. Isn't there at least one brave member of this forum who dares to accept this simple obvious truth?
-
Georg Künstler
- Devotee
- Posts: 1718
- Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 12:22 pm
- Location: Speyer, Germany
- Contact:
re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t
Hi PeterAX,
If you think I am not an expert in electric engineering, then please let me be an expert, when you explain me from where you will get the additional energy.
Formulas as you use it is only the view of an expert, and you copy the formula from this expert without understanding it.
You don't look around and see the condition under which circumstances this formula is valid.
This will be the case with a limited view.
So tell me, from where you will get the additional energy.
You can only transform one energy into another.
So find the additional energy source in your experiment.
If you think I am not an expert in electric engineering, then please let me be an expert, when you explain me from where you will get the additional energy.
Formulas as you use it is only the view of an expert, and you copy the formula from this expert without understanding it.
You don't look around and see the condition under which circumstances this formula is valid.
This will be the case with a limited view.
So tell me, from where you will get the additional energy.
You can only transform one energy into another.
So find the additional energy source in your experiment.
Best regards
Georg
Georg
re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t
To Georg Kunstler.
--------------------------
Hi there,
Don't be nervous, my friend!:) We are only discussing!:)
---------------------------
1) You wrote that "....You can only transform one energy into another.......". Well, you actually mean that (a) there are at least two different energies C and D and that (b) energy C transforms into energy D. Have I understood correctly your words?
2) If I have understood correctly your words, then which is energy C and which is energy D? Could you name separately these two energies C and D, if possible? Which are these two energies C and D? What are their names?
---------------------------
Looking forward to your answer.
--------------------------
Hi there,
Don't be nervous, my friend!:) We are only discussing!:)
---------------------------
1) You wrote that "....You can only transform one energy into another.......". Well, you actually mean that (a) there are at least two different energies C and D and that (b) energy C transforms into energy D. Have I understood correctly your words?
2) If I have understood correctly your words, then which is energy C and which is energy D? Could you name separately these two energies C and D, if possible? Which are these two energies C and D? What are their names?
---------------------------
Looking forward to your answer.
-
Georg Künstler
- Devotee
- Posts: 1718
- Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 12:22 pm
- Location: Speyer, Germany
- Contact:
re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t
Hi PeterAX,
energy can only be transformed.
Here you can see how it is managed. Look at the videos from Peter Salocher
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vz6PnPTW5Ds
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zZKWx3usT8
The energy source is the transmutation from hydrogen to helium.
So I ask you again, from where do you get your additional energy, energy gain in your experiment.
energy can only be transformed.
Here you can see how it is managed. Look at the videos from Peter Salocher
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vz6PnPTW5Ds
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zZKWx3usT8
The energy source is the transmutation from hydrogen to helium.
So I ask you again, from where do you get your additional energy, energy gain in your experiment.
Best regards
Georg
Georg
re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t
To Georg Kunstler.
---------------------------
1) "... transmutation from hydrogen to helium...". But this is a mere mental speculation and an absurd hypothesis for the present. (The latter is clearly declared in your videos.)
2) Where energy gain comes from? The answer is given in the text below. This text is limited up and down by double dashed-lines. Please read carefully and thoroughly the text below.
======================================================
======================================================
The text below is a copy of our post of April 13, 2021, 5:32 pm. (The text below has been published many times in this forum topic.)
----------------------------
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.
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.
---------------------------
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) The Joule's heat, generated in the process of electrolysis is given by
Q = (I) x (I) x (R) x (t) = ((m)/(Z x t)) x ((m)/(Z x t)) x (R) x (t) = (31.86 W) x (1200 s) = 38232 Ws = 38232 J = outlet energy 1.
3) 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 = (HHV) x (m) = (142 000 000) x (0.0001) = 14200 J = outlet energy 2,
where
m = mass of the released hydrogen
HHV = higher heating value oh hydrogen
4) Therefore we can write down the equalities:
4A) outlet energy 1 + outlet energy 2 = 38232 J + 14200 J = 52432 J
4B) inlet energy = 38232 J.
5) Therefore COP is given by
COP = 52432 J/38232 J = 1.37 <=> COP = 1.37 <=> COP > 1.
------------------------------
IMPORTANT NOTE. 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 the same COP = 1.37, that is, we have again the same COP > 1.
-----------------------------
IMPORTANT NOTE. The text above must be evaluated (SOLELY AND ONLY!) by highly qualified experts (Ph.D.) in electric engineering. Otherwise nothing will come out of it.
======================================================
======================================================
Please read carefully and thoroughly the text above.
Looking forward to your answer.
---------------------------
1) "... transmutation from hydrogen to helium...". But this is a mere mental speculation and an absurd hypothesis for the present. (The latter is clearly declared in your videos.)
2) Where energy gain comes from? The answer is given in the text below. This text is limited up and down by double dashed-lines. Please read carefully and thoroughly the text below.
======================================================
======================================================
The text below is a copy of our post of April 13, 2021, 5:32 pm. (The text below has been published many times in this forum topic.)
----------------------------
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.
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.
---------------------------
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) The Joule's heat, generated in the process of electrolysis is given by
Q = (I) x (I) x (R) x (t) = ((m)/(Z x t)) x ((m)/(Z x t)) x (R) x (t) = (31.86 W) x (1200 s) = 38232 Ws = 38232 J = outlet energy 1.
3) 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 = (HHV) x (m) = (142 000 000) x (0.0001) = 14200 J = outlet energy 2,
where
m = mass of the released hydrogen
HHV = higher heating value oh hydrogen
4) Therefore we can write down the equalities:
4A) outlet energy 1 + outlet energy 2 = 38232 J + 14200 J = 52432 J
4B) inlet energy = 38232 J.
5) Therefore COP is given by
COP = 52432 J/38232 J = 1.37 <=> COP = 1.37 <=> COP > 1.
------------------------------
IMPORTANT NOTE. 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 the same COP = 1.37, that is, we have again the same COP > 1.
-----------------------------
IMPORTANT NOTE. The text above must be evaluated (SOLELY AND ONLY!) by highly qualified experts (Ph.D.) in electric engineering. Otherwise nothing will come out of it.
======================================================
======================================================
Please read carefully and thoroughly the text above.
Looking forward to your answer.
re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t
Ctrl C, Ctrl V. If you keep pressing it, it might become fact.
re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t
To Tarsier79.
-------------------------------
As mentioned many times before you are writing here in this forum only because of writing itself. Instead of talking nonsense you could read some beginner's manual of physics and educate yourself in the field of electric engineering.
-------------------------------
As mentioned many times before you are writing here in this forum only because of writing itself. Instead of talking nonsense you could read some beginner's manual of physics and educate yourself in the field of electric engineering.
re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t
No, I just think that even an idiotic comment makes this thread more intelligent.
No-one is interested in your half-baked ill-conceived excuse for mathematics. You have no proof, you have a poor understanding of the process, and next time your cousin calls from India pretending to be from a local telco I still won't give him my credit card number.
No-one is interested in your half-baked ill-conceived excuse for mathematics. You have no proof, you have a poor understanding of the process, and next time your cousin calls from India pretending to be from a local telco I still won't give him my credit card number.
Re: re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency great
In the 4th post of this thread, all was explained to us.
the way up to twenty-one and the math seems to check out.
Of cause, we still have questions.
For instance, why are you on a forum of people interested in mechanics ISO a PhD in
electric engineering? That's a unicorn squared. No one on earth has such a degree. It
doesn't exist. Don't doubt me.
Another is if I break out my Simpson and stick the negative probe in your left ear and the
positive probe in your right ear, being ever so careful not to let the probes touch, what would
be the ohmic resistance? My guess is that air gap would be infinite.
Finally, when are you going to teach us how to flush dance? Humm?
All in all, this thread is a regular shit storm. A shit-a-cane.
I've taken off both sandals and pulled my zipper down so as to handle quantities allGeorge1 wrote:To m2x.
-----------
Thanks a lot for your reply.
Yes, that's it. Firstly, the heat generated by the resistor is = 1. Secondly, the heat generated by the burning of hydrogen is > 0. And the sum of these two is always bigger than one.
Looking forward to your answer.
Best regards,
George
the way up to twenty-one and the math seems to check out.
Of cause, we still have questions.
For instance, why are you on a forum of people interested in mechanics ISO a PhD in
electric engineering? That's a unicorn squared. No one on earth has such a degree. It
doesn't exist. Don't doubt me.
Another is if I break out my Simpson and stick the negative probe in your left ear and the
positive probe in your right ear, being ever so careful not to let the probes touch, what would
be the ohmic resistance? My guess is that air gap would be infinite.
Finally, when are you going to teach us how to flush dance? Humm?
All in all, this thread is a regular shit storm. A shit-a-cane.
- Attachments
-
........................¯\_(ツ)_/¯
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ the future is here ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Advocate of God Almighty, maker of heaven and earth and redeemer of my soul.
Walter Clarkson
© 2023 Walter W. Clarkson, LLC
All rights reserved. Do not even quote me w/o my expressed written consent.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ the future is here ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Advocate of God Almighty, maker of heaven and earth and redeemer of my soul.
Walter Clarkson
© 2023 Walter W. Clarkson, LLC
All rights reserved. Do not even quote me w/o my expressed written consent.
re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t
To Tarsier79.
------------------------------------------
Do you remember our correspondence of Tue Mar 16, 2021 3:11 pm illustrating your pathological ignorance and haterness? Look again at this post and refresh your memory!
------------------------------------------
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 8th 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 8th time. Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!
------------------------------------------
Do you remember our correspondence of Tue Mar 16, 2021 3:11 pm illustrating your pathological ignorance and haterness? Look again at this post and refresh your memory!
------------------------------------------
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 8th 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 8th time. Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!
re: A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater t
To WaltzCee.
--------------------------------------
The same question to you.
--------------------------------------
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"!
----------------------------------------
I am waiting for your PERSONAL(!) answer for the 1st time. Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!
--------------------------------------
The same question to you.
--------------------------------------
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"!
----------------------------------------
I am waiting for your PERSONAL(!) answer for the 1st time. Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!