On 31/10/2007 11:04 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > > > Harry Veeder wrote: >> On 29/10/2007 11:06 AM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote: > >>> Momentum, close relative of kinetic energy, can't be "bottled" and so >>> can't be sold. The kind of "energy" that is sold is all potential, not >>> kinetic, because "motion" can't be packaged. >> >> >> Kinetic energy is not a relative of momentum. It is the first step in >> packaging momentum. > > All I meant is they both involve motion. > > Kinetic energy = (1/2)mv^2, momentum = mv, and both require that > something be moving. So, they're hard to "bottle". > > I suppose you could sell kinetic energy in the form of a spinning > flywheel. Linear momentum, on the other hand, seems to be impossible to > sell as-is. (The merchandise tends to fly off the shelves before the > customers arrive...)
Somebody figured out how to sell that too a over a hundred years ago. Stick a paddle wheel in water or erect a windmill and connect them to an electrical generator and voila ... the linear momentum of the wind and water is packaged as electrical _energy_ and sold. Neat trick, eh? ;-) > >>> I don't understand what you mean by "unfair" here. >>> >>> If the system under test is a lead-acid battery, then it's the /only/ >>> way to assess the OU claim. >>> >> >> Measure how much energy is stored in the system. Then disconnect any power >> sources used in the measuring process and let the system run until such time >> the energy store would be expected to be so depleted that it couldn't >> possibly be powering the system. This requires an input of patience. ;-) > > Right, I can agree with that. > Harry
