Dave, you're nothing but a heretic. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. WELCOME to the Collective!  J

 

-Mark

 

From: David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com] 
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2013 2:03 PM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics?

 

Robin, you are right, I was afraid that I would break that nasty
thermodynamic law and become confined within a black hole.   ;-)
<http://o.aolcdn.com/cdn.webmail.aol.com/resources/core/images/wink.png> 

 

I was actually hoping that the solar cell argument would help me understand
why the heat engine limitations exist.  Now, I am a bit confused.  It is
just too easy to break that rule and get away with it.  I was hoping for a
good challenge.

 

So why not just harvest the heat energy around us and have that perpetual
motion machine that we would all desire?  All we have to do is to come up
with a process that converts the local IR into DC and be on the way.

 

Something is wrong with this picture unless the patent office needs to
reconsider their ban on patents that suggest perpetual motion.  Maybe not
after a little consideration,  sooner or most likely much later all of the
heat will be harvested and the patent office wins.  No perpetual motion is
possible.

 

Dave



-----Original Message-----
From: mixent <mix...@bigpond.com>
To: vortex-l <vortex-l@eskimo.com>
Sent: Fri, Jan 18, 2013 4:41 pm
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Does This System Beat Laws of Thermodynamics?

In reply to  David Roberson's message of Fri, 18 Jan 2013 14:10:12 -0500
(EST):
Hi,
[snip]
>I was thinking of a system that appears to take thermal energy and convert
it 
into mechanical energy in a useful manner.  The net effect is that the
system 
cools down in response.
> 
> 
>Suppose that a group of hot heads lives within a world that is at a very
high 
temperature, so hot in fact that everything radiates visible light instead
of 
the long wavelengths associated with our environment. 
 
That would be us, on a hot day. ;) 
 
 
> I guess it would resemble the surface of the sun to produce our standard 
spectrum.
> 
> 
>These guys construct a photoelectric cell that takes some of the ever
present 
light and converts it into DC voltage that is used to drive a motor. 
 
I have suggested several times in the past that a solar cell effectively
"rectifies" sunlight, producing DC current. Since DC has a frequency of
zero, it
represents a body that doesn't radiate, i.e. it is effectively at absolute
zero.
IOW, ideally, heat/light goes in and is stored (in a battery). Nothing comes
out
(depends on your definition of system boundaries).
 
 
> The motor is used to transport material from the surface of their world
into a 
higher location thereby producing gravitational energy.
 
This is the equivalent of storing the energy in a battery.
> 
> 
>Since light energy has been converted into mechanical work, less of it is 
present within the system so the world gets a bit cooler.  
 
Every body radiates and gets cooler all the time. Most of the time however
it
receives just as much energy as it radiates, so it is in thermal equilibrium
with it's environment (the exception being active cooling/heating devices).
 
>There is little doubt that the overall energy is conserved, but it does not

seem to require a low temperature heat sink for this engine to exhaust the
high 
temperature heat into.
 
Correct. Low temperature heat sinks are only required where the energy
remains
in the form of molecular kinetic energy throughout the process.
Conversion to potential rather than kinetic energy can remove the
requirement
for a low temperature heat sink. Which BTW is why wind chill is capable of
cooling water below ambient temperature. Energy is stored as potential
energy
when the hydrogen bonds between water molecules are broken. Only a very tiny
fraction of the energy required to create the temperature differential is
supplied by the wind. This is because the wind only removes the molecules
once
thermal energy has separated them. Once they are separated they are
effectively
"at infinity" relative to one another, so the attractive force between them
is
only a minute fraction of what it was when they were bound together by
Hydrogen
bonds in the liquid. It is only this remaining minute attraction that needs
to
be broken by the wind.
 
> 
> 
>It appears that the cold space surrounding a system can be used as the cool

sink if another is not available.  
 
???????
 
>In principle this suggests that it should be possible to take any system
that 
is above absolute zero temperature and extract heat from it which can be 
converted into another form of energy.  For some reason, this seems to be 
getting a free lunch and I must be missing something.
 
You fear you may be violating the second law of thermodynamics. ;)
 
> 
> 
>Support for this hypothesis is evident by observing the radiation of
thermal 
energy from hot bodies into free space.  The body cools down as it loses
energy 
as would be expected, but perhaps there are other ways to cool it down
besides 
radiation as the hot heads discovered.  The process I proposed is very much
like 
the conversion of gravitational energy of a gas into heat as the cloud 
collapses; only in reverse.
> 
> 
>Is this assumption wrong?
 
Expanding gasses often cool down. That's how refrigerators work. :)
 
Unfortunately, all you have really shown is that solar cells can harvest
energy,
which we already knew. ;)
Regards,
 
Robin van Spaandonk
 
http://rvanspaa.freehostia.com/project.html
 

Reply via email to