From: Teslaalset
Is there any theoretical Joule figure per Hydrogen ion?
Jed Rothwell wrote, in response to Robert Lynn:
RL: At those levels of power output any chemical power
source associated with the 0.3g wire would be exhausted within minutes.
JR: If not seconds. Ni does not absorb much gas.
And Jed is being generous. The electrochemistry of Nickel hydrides is
extremely well-researched due to the NiMH battery. and also due to hydrogen
storage in Ni ... and there is little chemical energy on adsorption.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel%E2%80%93metal_hydride_battery
What they do not tell you in articles like this is that the numbers really
do not add up nicely. NiMH should be a poor battery, at least "on paper"
since essentially it requires water-splitting, and you get back so little in
return. A fully charged cell supplies no more than 1.25 V/cell during
discharge, and H2O requires 1.48 V to split. But note that potassium is used
in these batteries - and Randell Mills would probably claim their advantage
comes from f/H instead of normal electrochemistry. Potassium plus nickel -
sound familiar?
In fact we even have a good idea nowadays how some metal ion batteries work
effectively "off paper" - and it is "supra-chemical" - beyond chemistry. We
know this from lead-acid batteries, another huge energy anomaly on paper.
Recently it has been found that the efficiency is due to relativistic
effects - in addition to smaller gains from chemistry. See: "Relativity and
the lead-acid battery" by Ahuja, et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. v.106, p.018301
(2011).
The average calculated standard voltage is 2.13 V for lead acid - much
higher than for NiMH, and calculations show that 1.7-1.8 V of this standard
voltage arise from relativistic effects ! mainly from electron mobility in
PbO2. You heard right, only about a quarter of the energy in a lead acid
battery comers from normal chemical redox energy. Yet it is far from
overunity.
And even though this is not familiar to all of us, the authors state- QUOTE:
"Concluding, the lead-acid battery belongs to those familiar phenomena,
whose characteristic features are due to the relativistic dynamics of fast
electrons when they move near a heavy nucleus. In this case the main actors
are the 6s valence electrons of lead....
It can be noted that with Nickel (in a similar fashion to lead) - BOTH the
fourth and sixth valence electrons of nickel are high Rydberg multiples,
which are essentially capable of the same relativistic effects as is seen in
lead, even though it is less heavy (less dense). No fusion or beta decay is
required and NO net gain, above input energy, is seen. A good case can be
made for the proposition that relativistic electrons are ALWAYS beyond the
normal confines of chemistry, even if there is absolutely NO overunity, per
se.
As to whether the energy above "chemistry" but still less than what some
redox can deliver - is somehow "nuclear" since electrons get a slingshot of
velocity from the nucleus, or something in between - that is fodder for
another post. The real mystery is how CoE manages to keep a rein on things
most of the time, when there are ways around it in common items, like
batteries.
Jones
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
