Actually I wouldn't use the term "atmosphere" to describe the energy source.
The output of such a device would be electricity. Lets say an appliance is
connected to the device and energy is given the appliance. The device, more
specifically the magnetic material, would cool down. The device would cool down
and reach thermal equilibrium due to thermal conduction. So we have a device
that's colder than room temperature and an appliance that is receiving energy.
Most appliances simply return the energy in the form of heat. In a nutshell,
energy is flowing from the device to the appliance to the air and back to the
device.
I've posted and attempted to explain how the MEG works. Such attempts at
explaining the process have been a waste of time. Even a simple outlined
explanation of the MCE process seems to be a waste of time. It just seems most
physicists are uninterested. Perhaps they disbelieve ... who knows why. I feel
like a legitimate unheard person shouting "Wolf."
Regards,
Paul Lowrance
Michel Jullian wrote:
> For calculus I can't help for lack of time I am afraid. Maybe you could
consider using software for that, Mathematica does wonders at solving tricky
integrals and such.
>
> Besides I must admit I don't understand much of what you're writing, knowing
very little about magnetism. I understand your aim is to use magnetic material
as a kind of heat pump to draw heat from the atmosphere, but that's about all.
Maybe you should make your explanations shorter and more practical. Suppose your
theory works as you expect, can you briefly describe the energy extraction
device workings, order of magnitude of the size, the form of energy it would
output? (heat, electricity?)
>
> Michel
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 7:09 PM
> Subject: Re: [Vo]: Quantum Thermodynamics
>
>
>> Please read the plea for help in this research at the bottom of this post.
>>
>>
>> Michel Jullian wrote:
>>> Paul the "how" question may be premature, the last I remember you had
>> convincingly shown that total magnetic field energy increased when two
magnets
>> got attracted to each other, in addition to their kinetic energy increasing,
but
>> couldn't the sum of these two energy increases be exactly equal to the energy
>> you must expend to separate them in the first place?
>>
>>
>> Michel, you are correct, as far as I know it requires the same energy to
>> separate the magnets. Actually it should require more energy to separate
since
>> there's always some energy loss such as radiation.
>>
>> Personally the idea of "getting something from nothing" has always been
>> unattractive. Therefore my research has always been about capturing ambient
>> temperature energy. IOW, atoms, electrons, molecules are moving and
vibrating at
>> room temperature-- electron velocity ~1/200 c. The average temperature of
our
>> planet is obviously sustained by the Sun. Therefore it's been my goal to
capture
>> that ambient temperature energy.
>>
>> I've simulated this far too many times in my head, which is one reason I'm
>> coding the simulation software. The idea is that a magnetic avalanche
consists
>> of magnetic atoms rotating and precessing in a avalanche. Such a rotating
>> magnetic field of each rotating atom generates radiation. Nearly all of such
>> radiation is absorbed by the magnetic material. Such radiation causes the
>> magnetic material to heat up, which is first half of the MCE (Magnetocaloric
>> effect) process. When the applied field is removed the aligned magnetic
moments
>> want to say in alignment, and therefore it requires energy to break the
magnetic
>> moment alignments. It is known that magnetic materials near absolute zero
>> Kelvin stay aligned without any applied field. The reason the magnetic
moments
>> in magnetic materials at room temperature break alignment is due to ambient
>> temperature. This removes energy from the magnetic materials ambient
>> temperature, which is why magnetic materials cool down when the applied
field is
>> removed.
>>
>> The idea is to capture enough of such radiation to overcome all losses while
>> providing enough energy to self-sustain the machine while providing useful
>> energy output.
>>
>> The above is a vague description of my research and cannot possibly convey
what
>> I've learned, as the technique of extracting this energy is very complex. A
>> researcher in this field will initially see interesting concepts such as
>> vibrating atoms have no rotation preference. Example, lets say the coil
>> influences more magnetic moments to rotate in a clockwise rotational
direction
>> in the avalanches. Although there is a great deal of rotational friction in
>> common magnetic materials, you will note that vibrating atoms do no have a
>> rotational preference. IOW, consider a single atom that we'll call X. A
>> neighboring atom could influence a counter-clockwise rotational force on
atom X.
>> Next, another neighboring atom could influence a clockwise rotational force
on
>> atom X. The average rotational force on atom X is zero.
>>
>> Such a researcher will also understand *saturated* magnetic material absorbs
>> appreciably less radiation. Another key note to such research is
understanding
>> the magnetic entropy in magnetic material during various situations. For
>> example, a fully saturated magnetic toroid at absolute zero Kelvin has zero
>> internal magnetic entropy. Magnetic material at Curie temperature has close
to
>> maximum internal magnetic entropy. The amount of magnetic entropy at say
300K
>> greatly varies from material to material. I theorize nanocrystalline and
>> amorphous magnetic materials possess relatively high magnetic entropy at room
>> temperatures. The idea is to influence maximum magnetic entropy followed by
an
>> energy extraction technique. On many occasions I have attempted to mentally
>> simulate the MEG. Such mental simulations indicate the precise permanent
magnet
>> within the MEG will greatly increase the magnetic entropy within the magnetic
>> material. Hopefully my simulation will confirm this and lead to an improved
>> design that will work on common silicon iron. One concern is that such energy
>> would mostly come from the inner core, which would cause rapid inner core
>> temperature changes. Such temperature changes would require a circuit that
>> adapts to such changes to maintain COP > 1.0.
>>
>> That's an outline. What boggles my mind is physicists publicly ignore this
>> research. Why? It sure would be nice if other qualified physicists would
>> publicly contribute to this research. IMHO the evidence is as clear as day
this
>> is a source of "free energy" obtainable with present technology. My only
>> purpose posting now a days is to gain help in this research. No offense
>> intended to cold fusion and ZPE research, but it boggles my mind why people
>> would continue such unknown territory when there's a guaranteed alternative.
All
>> that's required is a strong fundamental understanding of electromagnetism,
which
>> I could teach to even a child within a few weeks time. I am good at computer
>> programming and deep thinking, but my Calculus is somewhat rusty, which has
>> already delayed my research over two months.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Paul Lowrance
