RE: [Vo]:Griggs finally successful... don't mention OU?
Is not this the way forward? A successful company, using a small over-unity effect to gain an edge over the competition, but not mentioning OU? Might it be better to 'slug' some OU device so it's not overtly OU but is still better than the rest? Stephen R Lawrence, Cambridge Jed Rothwell wrote: Griggs left the company many years ago. There is no mention in the NASA documents or in any documents published by Hydrodynamics Inc. that the device is sometimes over-unity. They don't want to talk about that. It is more trouble than it's worth. They are friendly people, on the up and up. They are not trying to cover up anything, but they don't want to get involved in disputes with the physics establishment. - Jed /div
[Vo]:chg of email address
Dear Vortex, I'm changing my email from [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I can't find any electronic means of doing this, so could you do it? Many Thanks, Stephen R. Lawrence, Cambridge, England.
Efficient clothes drier uses De-humidifier?
Dear 'texians, I wanted to run this idea past the list... The traditional tumble (clothes) drier uses heated air to increase the rate at which the water in the clothes evaporates. But another approach might be to make the air as DRY as possible. The question is, does one use significantly less energy, per amount of water evaporated, by drying the air, or by heating it (or a combination of the two)? I would have thought that most of the energy required to heat air is actually the energy required to heat the water held in the air as humidity. An advantage might be that clothes could be dried at much lower temperatures (good for fragile clothes) -- a problem would be obtaining a sufficiently fast supply of dry air. Stephen R. Lawrence. From: Stephen Lawrence, 8 Supanee Court, French's Road, Cambridge, England, CB4 3LB. Tel/Fax +44 1223 564373
