> Actually, Michel, no one was fooled Wrong Jones, at least one person was: myself, between the moment I imagined the scheme and the moment I realized it couldn't work :/ After that admittedly it was hard to sound convincing :)
BTW your challenge/riddle beats me, can the thing be made OU after all? Michel ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jones Beene" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, March 05, 2007 9:07 PM Subject: [Vo]: Re: Loop closed? (was Re: High efficiency electrolysis) > Michel Jullian wrote: > > >>> My scheme simply can NOT work as I realized before I even posted it, because >>> the absolute max efficiency of a heat pump, which depends only on the >>> absolute >>> temperatures of the hot and cold sources, is exactly equal to one over the >>> absolute max efficiency of a heat engine working with the same temperature >>> sources (the formulae derive from the W and Q formula Ron gave), so that if >>> you increase one you decrease the other, and when you multiply the two the >>> very best you can get is a global COP of... 1. ;-( > > > Actually, Michel, no one was fooled by your ruse for a nanosecond, as I > am sure that you must realize but nevertheless, it is interesting to > continue the thread to its logical ending ... > > ...which is this: what you have stated above in not necessarily true: > i.e "when you multiply the two the very best you can get is a global COP > of 1" ... as you have neglected a very important point. > > So let me challenge you: can you find the fault in your own logic? > > Hint: this will involve expanding the formula outside of its local frame > into a larger frame of reference .... somewhat as a microcosm of the > differences between SR and GR. > > Jones >
