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

Tesla Paper

Free Energy Book

Get paid

Donations

Please Donate for the Forum.
Many thanks.
Regards, Stefan.(Admin)

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 Posts: 895801
  • *Total Topics: 15761
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 1
  • *Guests: 17
  • *Total: 18

Author Topic: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1  (Read 137769 times)

Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1891
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #420 on: December 23, 2020, 03:23:23 PM »
Dear Floor,
You want to convince all of us here in this forum that if 6 = 1 + 2 + 3, then 6 = 1. Congratulations! Fantastic achievement! You are a founder of an entirely new and revolutionary branch of mathematics! Take your medicine!:) Triple dose!:)

@George1

If you see a math error, just point it out.  I don't see one, at least not on my part.
       and
no not    6 = 1 + 2 + 3, then 6 = 1
      but
6 / 3 = 2 and 6 / 3 x 3 = 6   very well then, if this will clarify it for you
(6 / 3) = 2 and (6 / 3) x 3 = 6

In most circumstances energy is "conserved".  This is what makes it seem (to some) that
any one looking for O.U. processes is nutty.

Looking for O.U. has been for me, a path of learning.  To my mind, seeking O.U. is not
the exploration of how to get something from nothing, but rather the exploration of how
we might get energy from new and / or possibly little understood or even unknown
sources or methods.

Have we missed something ?  Perhaps that the ordinary electrolysis of water is O.U. ?   

If we have missed it,  you for one, certainly have not demonstrated how.
.....   .....   .....   .....   .....   .....   .....   .....   .....   .....
Analogous to water through a multi-path pipe system, electric current divides between
any 2 or more paths, in proportion to the resistance to its flow along those paths.

In the electrolysis process, the electric current's path is divided (within the electrolyte)
into paths where in some of the energy is expended as heat via conventional
electrical resistance and some of the energy is expended in splitting the water molecules.

Like unto the water and the water pipe analogy, the total current entering those paths, is
equal to the total current exiting them. 

In this case, the total energy in and out are equal as well.  But that energy has been
transformed into other than a purely electromagnetic form.

E or I alone, neither amounts to power.  But if there is a current flowing it is because an
electric potential has been realized. Where there exists an electric potential, current will flow
when the electrical resistance is low enough  (E / I x R).

Your, cut and past repetition of formulas (whether chemical or electrical) does not equate to
an understanding of those formulas.  If you have misunderstood them,  just get it straight
and move forward.  That's all.

If you make a few pennys from the views here, I don't begruge that.  But the forum is not
a venue for / of con men selling false free energy devices.




Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline George1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 744
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #421 on: December 26, 2020, 04:06:32 PM »
We are talking solely and only about standard DC water-splitting electrolysis process.
---------------------------------------------------
Whatever experiments to do you actually measure constant voltage V, constant direct current I, constant Ohmic resistance R and time t. The real experimental values of V, I, R and t would give three simple mathematical expressions:
1) V = I x R. This is Ohm's law.
2) V x I x t = I x I x R x t. This is the first Joule's law.
3) V x I x t < (I x I x R x t) + (Z x I x t x (HHV)). This is the OU property of any standard DC water-splitting electrolysis process.
----------------------------------------------------
Simple, clear and understandable. And anyone, who tries to reject this simple obvious truth, is either a clumsy and unskillful manipulator and/or a person, who has some severe mental problems.



Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1891
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #422 on: December 26, 2020, 09:45:04 PM »
George1 doesn't know basic electrity very well.

So for anyone interested in learning the basic electricity required to understand
the energy transfer and transformation involved in the dc electrolysis of pure water...

In addition to ohm's law as

 E = I x R  voltage = Amperage x Resistance
 I x R = E
 E / I = R
 E / R = I

there is next also ......

Kirchhoff's first law

For any junction in an electric circuit, the sum of currents entering that junction is equal to the sum of currents exiting that junction.

Kirchhoff's second law

The sum of the electric potential (voltage) drops around any closed circuit is equal to zero.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirchhoff%27s_circuit_laws
.....     .....     .....     .....     .....     .....     .....



Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #422 on: December 26, 2020, 09:45:04 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1891
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #423 on: December 26, 2020, 09:56:31 PM »
@ All readers

VERY NICE... complete course !

Basic electricty books. I have these in my own library (hard copies), classics / awsome.

https://archive.org/details/BasicElectricityVol1ToVol5VanValkenburgh/mode/2up

Best wishes
   floor

Offline George1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 744
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #424 on: January 03, 2021, 03:48:09 PM »
The text below can be found in many of our previous posts. Anyway let us repeat it again for those, who understand simple things with great difficulty.
-----------------------------
Have a look again at the book "Solved Problems in Physics", 2004, Volume 2, p. 876, solved problem 12.97. The author of this book is Prof. S. L. Srivastava (Ph.D.)
The same book can be found at the link https://books.google.bg/books?id=rrKFzLB9KQ8C&pg=PA876&lpg=PA876&dq=%22electrochemical+equivalent+of+hydrogen%22&source=bl&ots=tQ8PSMLet3&sig=ACfU3U2HOLB78XHl2o3q-JanapzSK-McJA&hl=bg&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjDpp2-zZXhAhWT5OAKHUfuBzUQ6AEwBHoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=%22electrochemical%20equivalent%20of%20hydrogen%22&f=false
--------------------------
For your convenience I am giving below the text of the problem and its solution.
--------------------------
12.97. In the electrolysis of sulphuric acid solution, 100 mg of hydrogen is liberated in a period of 20 minutes. The resistance of the electrolyte is 0.5 Ohm. Calculate the power consumed. Electrochemical equivalent of hydrogen is 1.044 x 10 -8 kg/C.
Solution: The power consumed is equal to 31.86 W.
Prof. S. L. Srivastava stops here his calculations.
(The related solution's set of equations is not given here in order to save time and space. This set of equations however can be found in the book or in the link above.)
--------------------------
WE DEVELOPED FURTHER PROF. SRIVASTAVA'S SOLVED PROBLEM IN A NON-STANDARD MANNER.
OUR FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF PROF. SRIVASTAVA'S SOLVED PROBLEM LED TO COP > 1.
HERE IS THE ESSENCE OF OUR APPROACH.
--------------------------
1) Let us calculate the inlet energy, that is, inlet energy = (31.86 W) x (1200 s) = 38232 Ws = 38232 J.
2) Let us calculate the current I. The current I is given by I = (m)/(Z x t) = 7.9 A,
where
m = 0.0001kg of hydrogen
Z = electrochemical equivalent of hydrogen
t = 1200 s
3) The Joule's heat, generated in the process of electrolysis is given by
Q = I x I x R x t = (7.9 A) x (7.9 A) x (0.5 Ohm) x (1200 s) = 37446 J = outlet energy 1.
4) HHV of hydrogen is 142 000 000 J/kg. Therefore the heat H, generated by burning/exploding of 0.0001 kg of hydrogen, is given by
H = (142 000 000) x (0.0001) = 14200 J = outlet energy 2.
5) Therefore we can write down the equalities:
5A) outlet energy 1 + outlet energy 2 = 37446 J + 14200 J = 51646 J
5B) inlet energy = 38232 J.
6) Therefore COP is given by
COP = 51646 J/38232 J = 1.35 <=> COP = 1.35 <=> COP > 1.
------------------------------
Constant pure water and cooling agent supply could keep constant the electrolyte's temperature, heat exchange, mass and ohmic resistance, respectively.
Besides 0.0001 kg of hydrogen (and the related amount of the already split pure water) is small enough and can be neglected as a factor influencing the electrolyte's temperature, mass and ohmic resisitance.
-----------------------------
And one more interesting fact.
Literally the same solved problem can be found in an old Russian (still from the Soviet times) book "Сборник задач и вопросов по физике", 1986, p. 130, solved example problem 71. The authors of this book are Р. А. Гладкова and Н. И. Кутиловская. In the Russian version the data is a little different, that is, time is 25 minutes, the amount of generated hydrogen is 150 mg, Ohmic resisitance is 0.4 Ohm and the calculated power is 37 W.
Russians also stopped their calculations at 37 W.
Our further development of the Russian version led to COP = 1.37, that is, we have again COP > 1.
-----------------------------
Therefore the text above unambiguously shows that it is a matter of exact experimental data which is in perfect accordance with theory. Because I cannot imagine that three highly qualified experts in physics (yet strongly separated by time, space and nationality) would have made one and same mistake three times in a row. This is impossible!"
-----------------------------
IF YOU REJECT THE VALIDITY OF THE TEXT ABOVE, THEN YOU REALLY HAVE SOME MENTAL PROBLEMS! AND YOU HAVE TO SEE YOUR DOCTOR!

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #424 on: January 03, 2021, 03:48:09 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline George1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 744
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #425 on: January 03, 2021, 03:49:03 PM »
Some careful analysis unambiguously show that the agents, who are in the pay of the official science mafia in this forum, use 6 clumsy and unskillful manipulation methods for rejecting of obvious truths. And these 6 methods are as follows.
-----------------------------------------
1) Simulation of ignorance and/or lack of understanding.
2) Distorting of our words.
3) Writing of long texts, full of semi-truths, absurd hypotheses and deliberately hidden theoretical/mathematical errors.
4) Writing of long texts, which have nothing to do with the discussed topic.
5) Direct ridiculous rejecting of obvious truths by using phrases like " This is impossible, because it is impossible and that's all!" and other similar howlers.
6) Various combinations of the above five,
-----------------------------------------
Our appeal is: Please do not fall under the influence of this forum's clumsy manipulators! These unworthy people are not seeking for the truth! They simply want to earn some money!

Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1891
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #426 on: January 03, 2021, 07:55:40 PM »
@ George1

Good morning, but no over unity here.

@ All readers

Interesting subject and  topic and I think a good /educational read.

Particularly the input from those, other than the topics originator (George1).

best
  wishes
      floor

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #426 on: January 03, 2021, 07:55:40 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline George1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 744
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #427 on: January 04, 2021, 02:43:38 PM »
Read very, very, very carefully again our last post of January 03, 2021, 03:48:09 PM.
-------------------------------------------------
Here is Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution:
Current through the electrolyte is given by I = (m)/(Z x t).
Power consumed = (I) x (I) x (R) =  ((m)/(Z x t)) x ((m)/(Z x t)) x (R) = 31.86 W.
-------------------------------------------------
It is absolutely evident from Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution (a) that each second the electrolyte (the liquid conductor) consumes 31.86 J of electric energy and (b) that each second the electrolyte (the liquid conductor) generates 31.86 J of Joule's heat. Do you accept this simple obvious truth? Do you accept Prof. S. L. Srivastava's (and his two Russian colleagues' some 40 years ago) solution? Yes or no?

Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1891
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #428 on: January 04, 2021, 04:01:08 PM »
@ George1

The heat and gasses evolved in the electrochemical reactions due to the sulfuric acid
are not a process of simply the electrolysis of water.

Why would you or anyone else assume that the electrolysis of a sulfuric acid solution gives,
the same results as, or is the same process as is the electrolysis of pure water ?

If ones goal is the production hydrogen gas, then it is true that this process can be
more "efficient" at hydrogen production than is that of the electrolysis of pure water.
But it still remains that the process is no more so a COP >1 or over unity, than is the
burning of a piece of wood.

I get it now! That must be your secret / unrevealed, free energy for sale device.  You're looking
for an investor to buy over unity fire wood.  Very clever! Oops did I just reveal the secret ?
Sorry.

      floor
 
 

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #428 on: January 04, 2021, 04:01:08 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline George1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 744
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #429 on: January 05, 2021, 01:13:19 PM »
To Floor.
-------------------
1) You do not answer my question, you old cheater!:) You are talking again about things that has nothing to do with the topic discussed. Your big mafia masters will not pay you your month salary. You keep failing in your attempts to manipulate the audience and to reject obvious facts. 
2) I am asking again my question. The question is: Do you accept Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution? Yes or no?

Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1891
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #430 on: January 05, 2021, 06:07:40 PM »
To Floor.
-------------------
1) You do not answer my question, you old cheater!:) You are talking again about things that has nothing to do with the topic discussed. Your big mafia masters will not pay you your month salary. You keep failing in your attempts to manipulate the audience and to reject obvious facts. 
2) I am asking again my question. The question is: Do you accept Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution? Yes or no?
"1 You do not answer my question, you old cheater!:) "

George1, it is your topic, and you are the one that bears the responsibility of answering peoples questions.
There are I think perhaps a dozen times, questions have been asked of you in the topic and to which you have not responded.   Instead you have ignored them and / or changed the subject of the discussion.  As you have done just now by specifying sulfuric acid solution as the electrolyte, then once again attacking and accusing a poster.

"You are talking again about things that has nothing to do with the topic discussed. "

Lie ! The things which I have posted are directly and exactly relevant to the subject matter.

"Your big mafia masters will not pay you your month salary. "

More made up fantasy, lies and empty accusations on your part. 
                There are no "big mafia masters" where I live.
              In the U.S, we handle this S--t when it pops up !
          I think You must have watched too many American movies,
                                    belived too much internet B.S..

If there is a disinformation agent in this topic, paid or strong armed or otherwise....
                                                it is you bud.

"You keep failing in your attempts to manipulate the audience and to reject obvious facts."

Just more B.S. on your part.  Information and some simple facts of the subject on my part .


"2) I am asking again my question. The question is: Do you accept Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution? Yes or no?"

Simply                No             not as you have misunderstood and misrepresented them.

If you place other chemicals (acidic or basic) and therefore other chemical reactions into the electrolyte you change the conditions of the electrolysis.

These will change the electrical conductivity / resistance of  electrolyte and therefore also the
current flowing and the power consumption during the electrolysis. Also change the heat generated by ohmic / conventional resistance. Other conditions and outcomes as well.

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #430 on: January 05, 2021, 06:07:40 PM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline George1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 744
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #431 on: January 08, 2021, 10:38:07 AM »
To Floor.
--------------------------
You are obviously a stubborn cheater and manipulator, you old guy!:)
--------------------------
I am asking you again: Do you have any THEORETICAL (ONLY THEORETICAL!) objections against Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution?
YES OR NO?

 

Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1891
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #432 on: January 08, 2021, 04:09:55 PM »
@George1

What is the goal of your topic here ?

   floor

Offline George1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 744
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #433 on: January 09, 2021, 12:45:13 PM »
To Floor.
-------------------------
You pretend to be an expert in theoretical and applied physics. I want you personally to answer a simple question. And this simple question is: Do you have any THEORETICAL (ONLY THEORETICAL!) objections against Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution? Yes or no?
(I want to stress upon the fact that your answer must be either "Yes" or "No". Simple and clear.)

Offline Floor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1891
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #434 on: January 09, 2021, 02:28:51 PM »


Thank you George1

I am flattered my arguments have so impressed you..

               BUT NO

There is not a single instance wherein, I have claimed,
any where in the entire Over Unity forum
to be an expert in theoretical and applied physics.

If  I appear to have shown so very brightly, rest assured, this is only the
 contrast between myself  and your own dimness.

 

OneLink