Michael Tobis wrote:
> That all said a device that could passively generate 50 watts of
> infrared per square meter would surely be enormously useful for other
> reasons. Perhaps there are some other problems with the design?
Like I said, it's a perpetual motion machine. Other than that, yeah it's
all peachy. Energy too cheap to meter etc etc.
Surprising the patent office didn't spot it as they are supposed to be
on the lookout for these things. OTOH perhaps one could argue that it
isn't technically a true perpetual motion machine, but it's close enough
(unless I misunderstand something, which is always possible).
James
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated
venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of
global environmental change.
Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the
submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not
gratuitously rude.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
