Subject: Negentropy - honed to a point
I am hoping to ad this 'Subject line' to the prior thread, which went
astray in cyberspace. Have we yet determined why this happens: the blank
subject line?
Does it have anything to do with the confluence of "entropy and
information" <g> or is it something more carnivorous?
Michel Jullian wrote,
> "Heatless explosion, interesting, I had never heard of this although
when you think about it there are well known chemical reactions where
volume increases while heat is absorbed, namely evaporations, so if you
combine any heat-releasing reaction, explosive or not, with an
evaporation reaction absorbing exactly the same heat you get an
explosion which doesn't release any heat.
> Elementary thermochemistry, doesn't violate any LoT I am afraid.
Well, the devil is in the details, and there are aspects of this which
are devilishly far from the simple Michel, and far from "elementary" I
am afraid, except perhaps for those observers who do not wish to be
challenged by the implications of a unique situation or look close
enough for the anomaly. Let me explain. Or - you can avail yourself of
pertinent literature directly:
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract;jsessionid=313817AFDE72404E29A1776595ABE980.tomcat1?fromPage=online&aid=18687
If a liquid at ambient temperature such as water, is violently turned
into steam, with no energy input - and that steam is expanded through a
turbine, where work is done - then ostensibly free-energy has been seen.
Aha, you respond- but this never happens, so it 'doesn't violate any LoT
I am afraid.'
However, Graneau et al. have shown that lowly water, at lest some types
of H2O, *does* have an unexplained energy component which can be
released. One of their papers also appears in "Infinite Energy".
And more importantly, if a liquid at ambient temperature such as HOOH,
is violently turned into steam, with no energy input - and that steam is
expanded through a turbine, and a surprising amount of work is done,
then ostensibly free-energy has been seen. Aha, you respond- yes this
does happen, but it 'doesn't violate any LoT I am afraid, since an equal
or greater amount of work was involved in producing the HOOH.'
This is reflexive response. But are you certain that HOOH cannot be
produced from water and oxygen without an equal or greater amount of
"work" than that which was is created on its expansion (explosion)?
Cannot some of that input be of the Graneau variety?
And even if that is not the case, does not a return of almost all of the
energy employed, even ambient, upwards to 99% returned - doesn't that
violate at least the intent of Carnot's insight as to heat engine
efficiency?
You see, now we have honed the situation down to where it as far from
elementary thermochemistry as that field permits - and it is not at all
clear to anyone who understands the intricacies of this situation that
that overall system - even if it doesn't directly violate a LoT, at
least as promulgated to fit the new situation, is definitely at least
five times (COP=5) more efficient than if one attempted to shoehorn the
results into the Carnot equations. Here is that Wiki entry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnot_heat_engine
Yes everyone knows that Carnot's equations are still called a 'theorem'
and cannot be elevated to a real law, since they only apply to limited
kind of heat engine, but how can a HOOH engine violate the Carnot result
by 500%?
Of course, it is always a simple task to amend, or to reinterpret any
sacrosanct "law" to account for hidden inputs like so-called "ambient
energy" or in the case of Graneau, they suspect some kind of solar
activation of water and this can be incorporated into the manufacture of
an "offending" chemical, which is based on water.
But that is the only way that this particular system, peroxide, doesn't
violate any LoT, I am afraid.
Jones
