Okay.. Two More Cents:
Just for clarification, references to the "skin effect" were made as an effort
to explain the temperature difference without a magical violation of CoE. I
was proposing a circumstance where misinterpretation of observations are the
root cause of the apparent power.
The effort was to point out that DC may be heating the coil more uniformly.
Hence, a 36.1 degree temperature seen with 1 watt DC and a 41.1 degree
temperature seen with 0.9 watt AC, even assuming a good-and-proper root mean
square, could be perfectly true with nothing magical occurring. Not from net
power gain, but from the limitations of the observer.
- Using a DC current, the heat may be more evenly dispersed throughout the coil
and core.
- Using an AC current (depending on frequency), the "skin effect" could be
pronounced enough to cause substantially more heating loss on the surface of
the wire, and less in the core. This would result in a higher temperature
being recorded outside of the coil, with the same net power dissipation. An
anxious observer could conclude that there is a net power gain, only because
there is no "tiny observer" in the material core to say it's colder inside than
with DC.
I profess again that I'm not an expert on conductive heating, but I would first
try to explain the current observations first using conventional physics. Only
when such observations cannot be explained using our current theories, should
we be entertaining something more exotic. The easiest explanation is usually
the right one.
Thus the original question set:
Q1) Does this uneven current flow (skin effect) translate to potentially uneven
heating - even at equilibrium**?
Q2) Could the nickel core be cooler in the middle with more heat being
concentrated, and subsequently shed, on the surface?
Q3) Could the surface of the inductor wires appear hotter, though the entire
conductor is dissipating the same amount of total heat?
**Do not confuse equilibrium and enthalpy**
Donating to the World, Two Cents at a Time,
R.L.
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2011 23:21:10 +0200
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Debunking Steorn Orbo
Am 19.09.2011 22:33, schrieb Joe Catania:
Now you are asking me to take it on faith from you. I find you less convincing
than Steorn.
Let me explain. All known rules about electricity and magnetism are compatible
with energy conservation.
It is therefore impossible to derive an extra energy mathematically, basing on
/known/ electromagnetic effects like skin effect.
There must be an energy source.
I dont say that the effect is untrue. If it is true then it is not an
electromagnetic effect.
Possibly the Nickel core contains spurious Hydrogen atoms.
Nickel is magnetostrictive. Possibly the AC induces magnetostrictive vibrations
in the core or current in microscopic superconductive spots and triggers
hydrogen Nickel fusion.
The next locical thing to do would be to measure the frequency depency of the
effect. Why didnt they do this? Or might they have done? Should I buy the
paper? Tell me the price.
Best,
Peter
