BlankRichard,
I think you are on the right track with the microwave input ...
this could have surprising and important implications.
Question three: anyone ever try using a microwave burst aimed
into the center of a vortex?
With this size of pipe, you will be unable to focus the normal
2.45 GHz output from a microwave magnetron (oven-variety) and a
specialized magnetron at higher frequency is very expensive.
However, given the size of the pipe - which is almost perfect for
a standing wave or traveling wave at the commercial frequency (no
problem with the FCC) then why not set it up that way? It could be
done cheaply and the upside potential for a serendipitous
discovery is enormous.
Matter of fact - the interaction of a standing or travelling
microwave with the water vortex - might create an interesting
situation IF the shear of the vortex does indeed generate strong
local EM fields which would be crossed orthogonally by the
microwave flux.
This is an implication of vortices in general (strong local EM
fields) although I am not able to document that at the moment. Any
electrolyte in the water would only help.
Of course the skeptic will counter - "why waste your time -
microwaves are not 'ionizing radiation' so don't expect miracles
".
And yes that is partly true, but microwaves are 'coherent'
radiation and any coherent radiation at high flux has a surprising
level of interaction with other forms of electromagnetism. For
instance you mentioned the laser - which is already focused but
getting a laser beam with a kilowatt of output will cost more than
even curious Texans are willing to spend - and even a laser is
technically not ionizing radiation...
...whereas any garage mechanic can cannibalize an oven and give
you a kilowatt of microwaves for cheap. Even if not ionizing on
their own, when this coherent radiation crosses a strong
local-field (from vortex shear) you may see both ionization and AT
THE SAME TIME, the centrifugal-centripetal forces necessary to
prevent immediate recombination. That gives the potential for
two-fold synergy due to vortex mechanics.
It is possible (though to be honest, not likely to be robust) that
you will get some level water-splitting this way - which would be
a major finding - not only for water purification (because of the
O2 and peroxides which would be there as well)... but also...if
(big IF) there was a surprising amount of H2 then this would have
immediate applications for large scale energy use.
Imagine - for instance - at every dam in the country retrofitting
the intake with vortex tubes .. then feeding the regular turbines
with a vortex flow of this type. There would be little loss of
power during high demand (some frictional heating) but the big
advantage would be at night, and in periods of low demand ,where
the electrical output of the turbines could be converted to
microwaves and fed back into the tubes to create a storable fuel -
hydrogen.
Never mind that the techniques for storage are not yet optimized.
There is probably no field of alternative energy getting more
attention these days than H2 storage. That problem will be solved
soon, no doubt.
Like many here I have been fascinated by the mechanics of the
Ranque-Hilsch tube for many years... so wouldn't it be dandy if
something like this found a ready niche in alternative energy (not
to mention helping to push along the hydrogen economy).
Jones
- Re: More questions Jones Beene
-
