I wrote:
In another sense, it would be no more overunity than a fission reactor,
since the energy would be coming from the conversion of mass via nuclear
reactions.
The obvious objection to the above is that the release of energy always
involves a mass deficit. The idea was that cold fusion
There are at least 5-10 different kinds of old and new stirling engines
available with 30-40% efficiency using 7-800°C input temperatures. They
range from 100W-30kW in capacity. So no problem doing a self-driven system
with LENR COP of 3.2
Qenergy probably easiest to get a hold of (around 33%,
Yes, but then you need to convert the physical energy into electrical which
will cause some extra loss.
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 10:01 PM, Robert Lynn
robert.gulliver.l...@gmail.com wrote:
There are at least 5-10 different kinds of old and new stirling engines
available with 30-40% efficiency
Brushless generators can be designed to do 97% efficiency. Not a
significant loss.
On 18 October 2014 17:17, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, but then you need to convert the physical energy into electrical
which will cause some extra loss.
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 10:01 PM,
From: Robert Lynn
Brushless generators can be designed to do 97% efficiency. Not a significant
loss.
John Berry wrote:
Yes, but then you need to convert the physical energy into electrical which
will cause some extra loss.
And one the least costly ways to get high efficiency (I
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
And one the least costly ways to get high efficiency (I have heard) is by
way of one of your “down under” washing machine motors – rewired as a
generator…
http://www.yourgreendream.com/diy_fisher_paykel.php
Paul and I
Do you believe that the Papp engine is a real over unity device. It ran is
self sustain mode in a third party dyno test and even won a patent of the
year award from the US patent office. The moral to this story, if people do
not want to believe, they just won't.
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 2:33 PM,
-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton
And one the least costly ways to get high efficiency (I have heard) is by
way of one of your “down under” washing machine motors – rewired as a
generator…
Paul and I tried one of these on the you-know-what. It even puts out
three phases and can
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
With that kind of test bed, it should be possible to close the loop with
anything over COP 1.2 electric-to-electric, like the Bedini, Newman and
other claims. Even if all four losses were considered (motor, generator,
-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton
With that kind of test bed, it should be possible to close the loop with
anything over COP 1.2 electric-to-electric, like the Bedini, Newman and
other claims. Even if all four losses were considered (motor, generator,
transformer, inverter) this
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 4:35 PM, Jones Beene jone...@pacbell.net wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Terry Blanton
With that kind of test bed, it should be possible to close the loop with
anything over COP 1.2 electric-to-electric, like the Bedini, Newman and
other claims. Even if all
Rossi had now shown that he can get COP3. Why doesn't he use that and
build an ecat out of that? Show it inside a black box with some extra
output, say 500W for several months. It will certainly destroy any doubt
concerning his invention and will not reveal any trade secret he has.
--
Daniel
Closing the loop with a hot side temperature of 1200C and a COP of 3, is
right on the very edge of possible...
You need close to 50% of theoretical carnot efficiency...
100C cold 1200C hot gives carnot of 0.76
Best possible heat to mechanical work.. (3*.76) = 2.28
Best possible Work to
So, Rossi would get 700W or so as a minimum for output.
--
Daniel Rocha - RJ
danieldi...@gmail.com
I don't know why Rossi doesn't do this. I think he must hardly have any
ingenuity - or the scientists/engineers that are in a position to advise
him! (Or you could think of more insulting terms).
To convert the output heat to electricity, and then convert it back to
input heat would have to
Did you read/understand Paul's analysis?
This is impractical and maybe impossible unless he can improve efficiency.
Carnot conversion just isn't great enough to turn the heat into usable
electricity.
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 3:24 PM, jwin...@cyllene.uwa.edu.au wrote:
I don't know why Rossi
On 18/10/2014 10:30 AM, John Berry wrote:
Did you read/understand Paul's analysis?
I didn't need to! Did you read/understand mine!?
This is impractical and maybe impossible unless he can improve efficiency.
Carnot conversion just isn't great enough to turn the heat into usable
electricity.
Active cooling would work as well as active heating so you don't need to
worry about carnot efficiency. Start it up and then keep it just hot
enough by pumping a liquid, under controlled rates, with an appropriately
high boiling point and decent specific heat and conductivity through the
system
On 18/10/2014 10:51 AM, James Bowery wrote:
Active cooling would work as well as active heating so you don't need
to worry about carnot efficiency. Start it up and then keep it just
hot enough by pumping a liquid, under controlled rates, with an
appropriately high boiling point and decent
I think vapor alone could do it. Make it pass through a turbine and cool it
down the stream down to 100C and heat it again. It is how it is done in
nuclear power plants.
2014-10-17 23:51 GMT-03:00 James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com:
Active cooling would work as well as active heating so you don't
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 3:45 PM, jwin...@cyllene.uwa.edu.au wrote:
On 18/10/2014 10:30 AM, John Berry wrote:
Did you read/understand Paul's analysis?
I didn't need to! Did you read/understand mine!?
No, only the first line. Touche.
Now I have I confess I do not know enough about the
I believe that the record shows that an ECAT went into thermal run away in the
earlier testing by the scientists. Is that not adequate to prove the point?
Dave
-Original Message-
From: jwinter jwin...@cyllene.uwa.edu.au
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Fri, Oct 17, 2014
We discussed that earlier as an alternative. At the time the operating
temperatures were quite a bit lower.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: James Bowery jabow...@gmail.com
To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com
Sent: Fri, Oct 17, 2014 10:51 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Why doesn't Rossi makes a
Yes, it is.
On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 5:03 PM, David Roberson dlrober...@aol.com wrote:
I believe that the record shows that an ECAT went into thermal run away in
the earlier testing by the scientists. Is that not adequate to prove the
point?
Dave
-Original Message-
From: jwinter
This assumes insulating it will have no adverse effect on the new fire,
but excessive insulation could extinguish it.
A good test to perform on the Hotcat would be to add the insulation *after*
start up.
Harry
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 10:24 PM, jwin...@cyllene.uwa.edu.au wrote:
I don't know why
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 9:00 PM, John Berry berry.joh...@gmail.com wrote:
If no fusion occurred it should be a 100% efficient conversion to heat, so
now with the energy of fusion, shouldn't it be overunity as a heater? Well
obviously yes unless energy is vanishing.
In a sense, a cold fusion
26 matches
Mail list logo
