A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater than 1

[ME]

As far as I paid attention it looks like Tarsier thinks your formula is not equivalent to the electrolysis situation.

To ME.
---------------------------------------------
Water electrolysis endothermic effect is actually a hypothesis. I am trying now to convince Tarsier79 (by using a step-by-step convincing procedure), that this hypothesis is wrong, but Tarsier79 is ignorant and stubborn.

But how is that wrong?
You need to add energy to split the hydrogen from the oxygen: that's what Endothermic means.
Why is it endothermic, because the water molecule is in a lower energy state.
It likes to be in that state more than in the separate 2O₂ and H₂ state.
And that's why it's so much easier to oxidize the separated hydrogen again with a bang and heat: Exothermic.

How that energy is added for the split does not really matter, but you need you input voltage of at least 1.23 volt and some amperage.
But you could also add energy thermochemically or by laser or radiation.

So please explain how this view is wrong.

[Tarsier79]

To Tarsier79.
-----------------------------------
Answer my question: How many Joules of heat must be drawn in from the electrolyte's surroundings?
-----------------------------------
All members of this forum are waiting for your "qualified" and "competent" answer.

My "qualified and competent answer" is that chemical reactions are in the field of chemistry, not electronics. Secondly, since you are unable to use a search engine, the answer to your question is here:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/en ... c-reaction

A quick search reveals that heat is also created as a by-product. That is not unexpected, and further complicates matters.

Water electrolysis endothermic effect is actually a hypothesis.

Again, this isn't what I am reading online. The common accepted scientific fact is that electrolysis is endothermic.

I will also state once again: Electrolysis is not as simple as you make it out to be. Your oversimplification blinds you to the errors you have used to draw incorrect conclusions. Energy consumption of electrolysis has to take many factors such as environmental temperature and pressure, anode and cathode material, type of electrolyte, what voltage is being applied and must include all the chemical reactions and localised environmental changes occurring throughout the process to be truly correct.

In electronics, the chemical process is simple. Watts consumed but not used for work = heat. This is why a LED headlight is far more efficient than heating up a wire till it glows white hot in a globe.

[MrTim]

--------------------------------------
4) Our third technology breakthrough however is not free. Let us remind again that our third technology breakthrough increases many times (twice as a minimum and more than 15 times as a maximum) the capacity of any standard now-existing battery. Our third technology breakthrough has both a theory and a working prototype. Our third technology breakthrough costs already $150,000,000. And this price will rise!
--------------------------------------

So your device is the size of a room, yet isn't any more powerful than a 1.5v AA battery. Not very efficient!

Our third technology breakthrough costs already $150,000,000. And this price will rise!
--------------------------------------

Adjusted for the Zimbabwean inflation rate, that's about $6 US... ;-)

[Georg Künstler]

my mobile phone is producing heat when I charge the accumulator.
it is also producing heat when I use the mobile phone.

So I have two time a heat production.

Now the location:
this energy can be used for heating in russsia, siberia during winter.
But it is usable in africa ?

We also have to recognize always under which conditions the experiment was made.
If we make the same experiment on Venus it will not work. On Jupiter it will be OK.

[PeterAX]

In 28 pages one and same simple thing is explained in many different ways. But nobody is reading CAREFULLY and THOROUGHLY my posts (if reading them at all). But never mind, I've got used to this situation.
--------------------------------------------------------------
So let us start again from the very beginning for the nth time (where n tends to infinity:)).
--------------------------------------------------------------
1) A standard DC water-splitting electrolysis process takes place in your laboratory.
2) A direct current I flows through the electrolyte. This direct current I is equal to 1A, that is, I = 1A. (This is the reading of your standard working DC ammeter.)
3) The Ohmic resistance R of the electrolyte is equal to 1Ohm, that is, R = 1Ohm. (This is the reading of your standard working DC ohmmeter.)
---------------------------------------------------------------
I am asking my (slightly modified) question for the 3rd time: How many Joules of heat per second (J/s) does the electrolyte absorb from the external environment?
Looking forward to your answer for the 3rd time.

[Tarsier79]

How about lets not.

[MrTim]

In 28 pages one and same simple thing is explained in many different ways. But nobody is reading CAREFULLY and THOROUGHLY my posts (if reading them at all). But never mind, I've got used to this situation.
--------------------------------------------------------------
.

Thank you for confirming that you are indeed George1... ;-)

Now please read CAREFULLY and THOROUGHLY my comments on pg 13 that CAREFULLY and THOROUGHLY prove that your theory is fatally flawed... ;-)

[Tarsier79]

George1 said:

You both always use one and same argument "This is impossible, because it is imppossible and that's all!". And this absurd argument is always followed by a long sequence of inappropriate jokes. It is simply impossible to have a serious discussion with you both.

Then George1 wrote:

But nobody is reading CAREFULLY and THOROUGHLY my posts

Everyone has patiently tried to have a conversation with you. You only want your side of the conversation heard, but refuse to listen to everyone elses arguments and opinions.

Everyone that wants to, already understands your ridiculously flawed circular logic.

You are treated with the contempt that you treat others.

[PeterAX]

To MrTim and Tarsier79.
---------------------------------------------------------------
1) A standard DC water-splitting electrolysis process takes place in your laboratory.
2) A direct current I flows through the electrolyte. This direct current I is equal to 1A, that is, I = 1A. (This is the reading of your standard working DC ammeter.)
3) The Ohmic resistance R of the electrolyte is equal to 1Ohm, that is, R = 1Ohm. (This is the reading of your standard working DC ohmmeter.)
---------------------------------------------------------------
I am asking you PERSONALLY my question for the 4th time: How many Joules of heat per second (J/s) does the electrolyte absorb from the external environment?
---------------------------------------------------------------
All members of this forum are looking forward to your PERSONAL answer for the 4th time.

[WaltzCee]

All members of this forum are looking forward to your PERSONAL answer for the 4th time.

This is not true. I know that to be a fact because I'm personally not remotely interested.
Since it isn't true what exactly is it? It's a lie, a damn lie. Now I know this quote is true:

Some people on this forum want you to propose some scheme of a schematic
or pictorial detailing something based in reality proving your assertion:

• A simple electric heater, which has efficiency greater than 1

I'm certain that is true.
Some are tired of your spewing bs and actually want you to put up or shut up.

[Tarsier79]

Once again, George chooses to pretend we haven't given him the answer:

I am asking you PERSONALLY my question for the 4th time: How many Joules of heat per second (J/s) does the electrolyte absorb from the external environment?

Here I will repeat my last answer

Secondly, since you are unable to use a search engine, the answer to your question is here:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/en ... c-reaction

If you read it, no-one can give you an answer without the rest of the data.

[PeterAX]

To Tarsier79 and to all other aggressive ignoramuses in this forum.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am asking my question for the 4th time: If I = 1A and if R = 1Ohm, then how many Joules of heat per second (J/s) does the electrolyte absorb from the external environment?
WRITE DOWN THE NUMBER OF JOULES!
Looking forward to your answer for the 4th time.

[agor95]

How are these topics related to the Bessler Wheel?

Just wanted to ask before putting these login IDs into the ignore list for this year.

Note. Ignoramus

Late 16th century (as the endorsement made by a grand jury on an indictment considered backed by insufficient evidence to bring before a petty jury): Latin, literally 'we do not know' (in legal use 'we take no notice of it'), from ignorare (see ignore).

[PeterAX]

To agor95.
-----------------------------
1) Please excuse me, dear colleague! I did not intend to insult you! The word "ignoramus" was not directed to you, but to some pseudoexperts here like Tarsier79 and similar people.
2) And yes, you are right, electrolysis has nothing to do with Bessler wheel. But we (our team) have the impression, that this forum is open for new technology discussions of any kind.
3) And please excuse me again, if I have insulted you! I am really sorry!

[Tarsier79]

Once Again:

Secondly, since you are unable to use a search engine, the answer to your question is here:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/en ... c-reaction

Get your "Team" to look at the web site with the answer to your question. Maybe they can explain it to you.

To Tarsier79 and to all other aggressive ignoramuses in this forum....

Your oversimplification of something that is quite complex does point to there being an ignoramus in this conversation.