Language: 
To browser these website, it's necessary to store cookies on your computer.
The cookies contain no personal information, they are required for program control.
  the storage of cookies while browsing this website, on Login and Register.

GDPR and DSGVO law

Storing Cookies (See : http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm ) help us to bring you our services at overunity.com . If you use this website and our services you declare yourself okay with using cookies .More Infos here:
https://overunity.com/5553/privacy-policy/
If you do not agree with storing cookies, please LEAVE this website now. From the 25th of May 2018, every existing user has to accept the GDPR agreement at first login. If a user is unwilling to accept the GDPR, he should email us and request to erase his account. Many thanks for your understanding.
Amazon Warehouse Deals ! Now even more Deep Discounts ! Check out these great prices on slightly used or just opened once only items.I always buy my gadgets via these great Warehouse deals ! Highly recommended ! Many thanks for supporting OverUnity.com this way.

User Menu

A-Ads

Powerbox

Smartbox

3D Solar

3D Solar Panels

DC2DC converter

Micro JouleThief

FireMatch

FireMatch

CCKnife

CCKnife

CCTool

CCTool

Magpi Magazine

Magpi Magazine Free Rasberry Pi Magazine

Battery Recondition

Battery Recondition

Arduino

Ultracaps

YT Subscribe

Gravity Machines

Tesla-Ebook

Magnet Secrets

Lindemann Video

Navigation

Products

Products

WaterMotor kit

Statistics

  • *Total Members: 83569
  • *Latest: jank

  • *Total Posts: 515006
  • *Total Topics: 15320
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 4
  • *Guests: 18
  • *Total: 22

Author Topic: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1  (Read 47322 times)

Offline George1

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 269
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #30 on: February 21, 2019, 09:28:30 AM »
To gyalasun.
--------------
Hi again Gyala,
Floor has sent to me the link  https://overunity.com/16302/hho-as-real-uo-system/.
A very, very interesting idea! What is your opinion?
Looking forward to your answer.
Best regards,
George

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline George1

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 269
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #31 on: February 21, 2019, 09:59:54 AM »
To Floor and gyalasun.
-------------------------
I already wrote to John.K1 whose link is  https://overunity.com/16302/hho-as-real-uo-system/
In my poor opinion his idea is wonderful. As if there aren't any contradictions. What do you both think about his conception?
Looking forward to your answers.
Best regards,
George

Offline George1

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 269
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #32 on: February 21, 2019, 11:41:35 AM »
To Floor and gyalasun
-------------------------
John.K1 wrote:
"Hello there.
Couple days ago I was thinking about the HHO device possibly leading to OU . And why do I think this way?It is very simple- Hydrogen is lighter than an air and rise up. Imagine you break water in to the hydrogen and oxygen on the ground and leave hydrogen to rise to couple hundreds of meters on its own. In that high you burn it back in some generator (60% of electricity back to the system) and use the water as a result  to make a rest of work on its all way down.

Would it work?  Maybe in the walls of water dams or high buildings?
Just some idea."
---------------------------
We discussed here the topic with the colleagues. I would suggest a short summary of the discussion.
1) Joule's heating, i. e. generation of energy for a first time.
2) The generated hydrogen could be put inside/enters easily a baloon which could go up (being lighter than air and because of the Archimedes principle) to couple of hundred meters and could pull a load thus generating energy for a second time.
3) At the height of these couple of hundred meters you burn back the hydrogen and generate energy (heat) for a third time.
4) The generated water goes down and generates energy for a fourth time.
5) The load lifted in item 2 also goes down and generates energy for a fifth time
What are your opinions about this combination of ideas and for this further development of the conception?
Looking forward to your answers.
Best regards,
George


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #32 on: February 21, 2019, 11:41:35 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline George1

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 269
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #33 on: February 21, 2019, 11:44:07 AM »
Item 5 in the last post is wrong. Please excuse me. I am sorry.
Regards,
George

Offline forest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3892
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #34 on: February 21, 2019, 12:44:14 PM »
Do you know this is exactly what Tesla described in his famous article  / What he didn't tell us is the whole process of extracting energy but his analogy was much more nicer being more realistic.
Imagine a lake maybe in high mountain without any possible dam. Lake is very deep. Tesla found a way to extract energy of this lake water without using a dam. You are very close.  :P

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #34 on: February 21, 2019, 12:44:14 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline George1

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 269
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #35 on: February 21, 2019, 03:25:51 PM »
Do you know this is exactly what Tesla described in his famous article  / What he didn't tell us is the whole process of extracting energy but his analogy was much more nicer being more realistic.
Imagine a lake maybe in high mountain without any possible dam. Lake is very deep. Tesla found a way to extract energy of this lake water without using a dam. You are very close.
-------------------
To forest.
-----------------
Hi forest.
Thanks a lot for your reply.
1) Actually the idea for this original way of water lifting belongs to John.K1. (Please have a look at the link https://overunity.com/16302/hho-as-real-uo-system/ ). We only added the load-pulling balloon conception and combined John.K1's basic idea with our points of view. (I already wrote to this smart man John.K1, but still have no answer from him.)
2) Our team has never heard of the above mentioned Tesla's article. Would you be so polite to give us some more details? How to find this article in order to read it?
Looking forward to your answer.
Best regards,
George     

Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4005
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #36 on: February 21, 2019, 05:20:42 PM »
Hi George,

My opinion on the idea member John.K1 wrote is exactly the same what I kindly wrote to you already:

"The only problem is that real and good science should be based on actual measurement results.  It is okay that by logical deductions which are based on experimentally proven equations, the setup you proposed "should give" efficiency > 1.
BUT this > 1 efficiency then should be measured, that is science in the correct sense.
I am not against you or against your group or against the possibility of having efficiency > 1,  ok?
And especially in such a case when you write this: "Therefore here is another proof for the invalidity of the law of conservation of energy in this particular case."  the measurement results are crucial and simply a must to backup your statement."

No offense, I am not being sarcastic, the idea from John.K is also an excellent one for approaching > 1 efficiency, that so far has not been shown possible in a scientific way.

However, I am a bit surprised what you wrote here to me:

To gyulasun.
-------------
Hi Gyula,
Thanks a lot for your reply.
....
Yes, after a careful thought we decided that you are absolutely right. We perfectly agree with you. Real experiments are necessary for proving of our statement. So I keep pressing hard our expert in experimental calorimetry to do the necessary things as quickly as possible.
=======
2) Besides (as if already mentioned in some of my previous posts) we do not insist by all means on the necessity of considering the hydrogen generating electrolyzer as a machine of efficiency bigger than 1. In our poor opinion it's perfectly enough if the hydrogen generating electrolyzer is considered as a simple and cheap heating device, which (a) is much more efficient than any standard Joule's heating device, and which (b) saves money.
=======
Looking forward to your answer.             
Best regards,
George

Why would not the measured efficiency > 1 be needed in your case ?
This questions your whole paper you started with this thread and your original claim on achieving > 1 efficiency.

Eventually what the 800 page long measurement data boils down to ? You could sum it up in a few lines I suppose once you or your group already went through the tests and surely developed an objective opinion based strictly on the measured data. OF course you or your group have plenty of time to do so and consider the teachings of the measurements, I do not mean any hurry.
And you are free to do whatever you wish, even combine ideas from others to improve yours, I have no problem with that.

BUT remember what you wrote: "Therefore here is another proof for the invalidity of the law of conservation of energy in this particular case."   If you do not back up your claim with correctly measured and repeatable results that give > 1 efficiency, your claim is hot air that no need to comment any more. It is totally irrevelant how logical or even straightforward deductions you started out from, you or your group simply have to build it in practice and measure it correctly.  Only then can you claim the invalidity of any law. It is obvious that  if you prove by measurements that your heating device is "cheaper" and "much more efficient" than any other standard heating device, then you surely have achieved something new and useful.  But if it has an efficiency of < 1, then your > 1 efficiency claim (you now seem to abandon) is only hot air. 

Gyula


Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #36 on: February 21, 2019, 05:20:42 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1106
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #37 on: February 21, 2019, 08:22:06 PM »
@George1

The link I sent you was not the same topic I originally had in mind (although same idea).  The topic I was looking for is a more recent
one.      As I  recall.... I posted on that  "more recent"  topic.   I tried searching through my posts.. but was unsuccessful in locating that
other topic.

            floor

Offline forest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3892
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #38 on: February 21, 2019, 08:24:32 PM »
http://www.shamanicengineering.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Nikola-Tesla-Problem-of-Increasing-Human-Energy.pdf


Imagine a lake in mountain without any possibility to make a dam. Lake has a lot of water and is very deep. How can we take energy of this whole mass of water ? 
Put an empty tank at  the bottom of lake with a passage of water inside of it. When water is passing it will crank the first generator, then it is converted to hydrogen and oxygen and is released up to the surface where it's converted back to water.
The buoyancy will transfer internal gravity pressure of water column on empty tank into the kinetic force of releases gases so use another generators in the passage. So we have 4 points where energy is converted/used , but  2 of them is roughly balancing itself (converting water into hydrogen and oxygen and back).
Tesla neved told about the usage of gravity in his example.The total converted electrical energy should be more then enough to convert water into gases and keep the tank empty .


As you see this is the same process but quite realistic one. Surely, Tesla would never use the lake when he had better source of pressure....

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #38 on: February 21, 2019, 08:24:32 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline forest

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3892
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #39 on: February 21, 2019, 08:33:41 PM »
A DEPARTURE FROM KNOWN METHODS – POSSIBILITY OF A "SELF-ACTING" ENGINE OR MACHINE, INANIMATE, YET CAPABLE, LIKE A LIVING BEING, OF DERIVING ENERGY FROM THE MEDIUM – THE IDEAL WAY OF OBTAINING MOTIVE POWER.

Offline George1

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 269
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #40 on: February 22, 2019, 10:16:52 AM »
To Gyulasun.
-----------
Hi Gyala,
Thanks a lot for your reply.
----------------
I know that you are a man of good will and we highly appreciate your positive and constructive criticism. Yes, you are absolutely right that precise and numerous tests have to be done in order to prove the validity of any theory. We do not argue about this.
----------------
Thanks a lot for your note that there isn't an urgent necessity to be in a hurry with the proper and adequate shortening of our 800-pages experimental report. The shortening process will take some time. (Besides some of the experiments seem to me not very accurate and as if have to be repeated. Now I am studying hard а textbook of experimental calorimetry (a) because (as mentioned in my previous posts) I am not an expert in experimental calorimetry and (b) because I have to know exactly what happens in these calorimetric experiments, what are the basic methods of experimental calorimetry, what basic devices are used in experimental calorimetry, etc. So I need some time to educate myself in the field of experimental calorimetry and become an expert at some satisfactory level. And, if necessary, to repeat and carry out personally some of the related calorimetric experiments.)
----------------
Yesterday almost all members of our team gather together. We discussed the topic within a period of several hours. It was a very interesting discussion. Various opinions were presented and talked about. A member of our team had a very interesting and reasonable (in my poor opinion) point of view. And here is his line of reasoning.
He said approximately the following.
BEGINNING OF THE QUOTE
a) If we have one true experimental fact, then we have one true experimental fact.
b) If we gather together two true experimental facts, then we will have one true experimental fact.
c) If we gather together three true experimental facts, then we will have one true experimental fact.
d) If we gather together four true experimental facts, then we will have one true experimental fact.     
e) If we gather together n true experimental facts, then we will have one true experimental fact. (Where n is any natural number.)
Therefore we do not need to carry out again n experiments in order to prove the validity of one experiment.
-------------------
There is a bunch of six true experimental facts (given below).
1) First Joule's law: Q = I x I x R x t (experimentally proved for both solid and liquid resistors).
2) Ohm's law: V = I x R (experimentally proved for both solid and liquid resistors).
3) Faraday's law of electrolysis: m = z x I x t (experimentally proved).
4) LHV of hydrogen = 120 MJ/kg = 33 kWh/kg (experimentally proved).
5) HHV of hydrogen = 142 MJ/kg = 40 kWh/kg (experimentally proved).
6) Considering the industrial production of hydrogen, and using current best processes for water electrolysis (PEM or alkaline electrolysis) which have a hydrogen-generating efficiency of 70–80%, producing 1 kg of hydrogen (which has a specific energy of 143 MJ/kg or about 40 kWh/kg) requires 50–55 kWh of electricity (experimentally proved).
--------------------
If we gather together the last six true experimental facts, then we will have one true experimental fact, which is an efficiency bigger than 1.
Therefore we do not need to carry out again six experiments in order to prove the validity of one experiment.
END OF THE QUOTE
I know that you will object to the above point of view of our colleague. But anyway there is a logic in it. According to your requirement we have to carry out again six experiments which have been proving to be true within a period of more than one century. Isn't this an absurd?
Looking forward to your answer.
Best regards,
George 

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #40 on: February 22, 2019, 10:16:52 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline George1

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 269
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #41 on: February 22, 2019, 10:22:26 AM »
To forest.
-------------
Hi forest.
Thanks a lot for your reply and for the link with the Tesla's article. I would need some time however to understand fully and assimilate entirely this extremely interesting text. I will write to you in the nearest future.
Best regards,
George 

Offline George1

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 269
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #42 on: February 22, 2019, 10:33:33 AM »
To Floor.
----------------------------
Hi, Floor.
Thanks a lot for your reply.
It's ok. No problem that you haven't locate this more recent topic. Please send it to me if you find it. I will search for it either.
We'll be in touch with you.
Best regards,
George

Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4005
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #43 on: February 22, 2019, 05:44:13 PM »
...
...   According to your requirement we have to carry out again six experiments which have been proving to be true within a period of more than one century. Isn't this an absurd?
...
Hi George,

Simply put: I did not write or imply or suggest to carry out again those 6 experiments, this is a misunderstanding I suppose.

The results should already be included in your 800 page long report.  All you would need to do is to collect relevant data your measurements gave, from which it turns out you have received an efficiency > 1.

The output work done by the burning Hidrogen can be expressed by heating up for instance X amount of water from T1 to T2 temperature, this then could be compared to the input energy needed for electrolyzing a known quantity of liquid (with known start and end temperatures) with a measured amount of DC power during an Y amount of time duration needed for producing the Hidrogen.  I also assume you checked the quantity of the Hidrogen received from the electrolysis during an Y time duration.

Maybe I have left out something also important,  I do not wish to tell you how such an experiment should exactly be done, I just indicate how I think it would be a correct way (and I may have not considered every important issue, I am not an expert in experimental calorimetry either).
One more thing to consider: if there are no MEASURED results, the scientific community will simply not accept claims on efficiency > 1.  It's not only me who would ask for measured results.
You may say for this, you do not care.  Well, you can disregard this of course but then you would need somehow "prove" you are right, by say a device that works with > 1 efficiency as per your claims. And if you have a working device, then somehow its efficiency can be measured, no?  8)

Gyula

Offline George1

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 269
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #44 on: February 23, 2019, 12:38:51 PM »
Hi Gyula,
Thanks a lot for your interesting and instructive last text. I will consider it carefully and will write to you in the nearest future (after a day or two). I would like to ask a few questions too.
Best regards,
George 

 

OneLink