I haven't read this fully yet (no time) but have been told it is a very interesting paper.
Damian
http://www.eleceng.adelaide.edu.au/pers ... tt2010.pdf
The world energy debate
Moderator: scott
The world energy debate
I only realized too late that life was short.
re: The world energy debate
Link from Free_Energy Forum
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-P...&RS=PN/6938422
The above link is a description of US patent no. 6938422. The inventor
claims to extract atmospheric heat and converting it into electricity
successfully with a 105%. There is a widespread belief among many
physicists any machine that claims to extract atmospheric heat and
converting it successfully into electricity CERTAINLY VIOLATES 2ND LAW
OF THERMODYNAMICS. But at least, the US patent office clearly goes
against this kind of view by granting patent to an apparatus that
claims to VIOLATE 2ND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS.
Does this machine really violates 2nd law of thermodynamics. Those who
are arguing in this fashion against this kind of machines, rarely give
any entropy calculation of the processes of the machines. Instead, so
far as per my experience, they just say words(!) like "go back to basic
physics again", "are you really a physics graduate" like kind of
rubbish. Now, I just want to see what they will say to the patent
examiners.
Ralph
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-P...&RS=PN/6938422
The above link is a description of US patent no. 6938422. The inventor
claims to extract atmospheric heat and converting it into electricity
successfully with a 105%. There is a widespread belief among many
physicists any machine that claims to extract atmospheric heat and
converting it successfully into electricity CERTAINLY VIOLATES 2ND LAW
OF THERMODYNAMICS. But at least, the US patent office clearly goes
against this kind of view by granting patent to an apparatus that
claims to VIOLATE 2ND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS.
Does this machine really violates 2nd law of thermodynamics. Those who
are arguing in this fashion against this kind of machines, rarely give
any entropy calculation of the processes of the machines. Instead, so
far as per my experience, they just say words(!) like "go back to basic
physics again", "are you really a physics graduate" like kind of
rubbish. Now, I just want to see what they will say to the patent
examiners.
Ralph
re: The world energy debate
I'm also at Eric Krieg free_energy list.
Here I copy the received msg and the quote I sent:
''Of sure, this is a heat-pump application, a 100 year well known stuff.
For years I had in mind to try this, since I have plans for a NEW and REAL fluids heat exchanger.
I have draws from 1816 that show the same now-days design. :(
If heat-pump environment is at equator, a huge surplus will be possible... but in the Pole...
A combination with sun heat collectors should be great.
Cheers!
Murilo SP feb/13th
To: free_energy
From: pranabjyoti_calcutta123
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 23:02:53 -0800
Subject: [free_energy] A "2nd kind of perpetual motion machine" got patent in USA
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-P...&RS=PN/6938422
The above link is a description of US patent no. 6938422. The inventor claims to extract atmospheric heat and converting it into electricity successfully with a 105%. There is a widespread belief among many physicists any machine that claims to extract atmospheric heat and converting it successfully into electricity CERTAINLY VIOLATES 2ND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS. But at least, the US patent office clearly goes against this kind of view by granting patent to an apparatus that claims to VIOLATE 2ND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS.
Does this machine really violates 2nd law of thermodynamics. Those who are arguing in this fashion against this kind of machines, rarely give any entropy calculation of the processes of the machines. Instead, so far as per my experience, they just say words(!) like "go back to basic physics again", "are you really a physics graduate" like kind of rubbish. Now, I just want to see what they will say to the patent examiners.''
Best! M.
Here I copy the received msg and the quote I sent:
''Of sure, this is a heat-pump application, a 100 year well known stuff.
For years I had in mind to try this, since I have plans for a NEW and REAL fluids heat exchanger.
I have draws from 1816 that show the same now-days design. :(
If heat-pump environment is at equator, a huge surplus will be possible... but in the Pole...
A combination with sun heat collectors should be great.
Cheers!
Murilo SP feb/13th
To: free_energy
From: pranabjyoti_calcutta123
Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 23:02:53 -0800
Subject: [free_energy] A "2nd kind of perpetual motion machine" got patent in USA
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-P...&RS=PN/6938422
The above link is a description of US patent no. 6938422. The inventor claims to extract atmospheric heat and converting it into electricity successfully with a 105%. There is a widespread belief among many physicists any machine that claims to extract atmospheric heat and converting it successfully into electricity CERTAINLY VIOLATES 2ND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS. But at least, the US patent office clearly goes against this kind of view by granting patent to an apparatus that claims to VIOLATE 2ND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS.
Does this machine really violates 2nd law of thermodynamics. Those who are arguing in this fashion against this kind of machines, rarely give any entropy calculation of the processes of the machines. Instead, so far as per my experience, they just say words(!) like "go back to basic physics again", "are you really a physics graduate" like kind of rubbish. Now, I just want to see what they will say to the patent examiners.''
Best! M.