Quoting from the conclusion of the article they reiterate the "explanation" of the source of energy:
"The difference in the latent heat between fog and bulk water is eventually restored by heat in the atmosphere, which allows the fog to condense and return to earth." Does this make any sense to anyone? Obviously it made sense to the peer reviewers. On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 3:21 PM, James Bowery <[email protected]> wrote: > Quoting > http://www.scribd.com/doc/15115795/Graneau-Paper-on-Water-Explosions > > The internal-energy difference between the cold fog expelled from the > accelerator must be made up by atmospheric heat – that is, essentially by > solar energy. No other energy source appears to be available for replacing > the extracted kinetic energy. > > > This 'cold fog' expansion with high kinetic energy drawing from ambient > heat would seem to violate Carnot's Law. > > Has anyone found a peer-reviewed replication of Graneau's phenomenon? > > PS: Is Graneau's peer-reveiewed paper, inked above, what set McKubre off > on his quest for the Papp phenomenon via Bob Rohner because he had at least > plausible evidence of 10 to 1 return on energy from a similar phenomenon? >
