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.
 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

Custom Search

### Author Topic: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1  (Read 221593 times)

#### George1

• Hero Member
• Posts: 884
##### Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #660 on: June 29, 2021, 10:16:54 AM »
To JerryVolland an to Floor.
==========================
Hi paid agents of the official science mafia,
Your primitive manipulation techniques do not give any result, this is more than evident. Take some beginner's manipulation techniques guide and study it very, very carefully. Because otherwise you both simply resemble clowns!
=========================
Look again at our last post of June 28, 2021, 09:44:18 AM. Let us proceed further with our previous questions as written in our last post of June 28, 2021, 09:44:18 AM.
----------------------------
Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution is given below.
Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution consists of two lines only.
LINE 1. Current through the electrolyte is given by I = (m)/(Z x t).
LINE 2. Power consumed = (I) x (I) x (R) =  ((m)/(Z x t)) x ((m)/(Z x t)) x (R) = 31.86 W.
---------------------------------------
I am asking you (PERSONALLY!) my question for the 28th time: Is Prof. S. L. Srivastava's solution correct? Yes or no? Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!
----------------------------------------
All members of this forum are waiting for your PERSONAL(!) answer for the 28th time. Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!

#### ramset

• Hero Member
• Posts: 7889
##### Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #661 on: June 29, 2021, 01:24:07 PM »
George
Sorry if I have missed it , your claim has it been built ?

You engage a few men here who build and show their work
Good result or not so good , honestly!

The scientific method or empirical testing with 100% transparency is how we advance .

Math can be a nice start , however your initial claim in post number one seemed simple?
And you mentioned a group you work with?

Have you built the device ? Is it open source ( forum theme)
Can you show it to scientific community here ?(demonstration / lab
Will you take a phone call to discuss this ?

Respectfully
Chet K
Or can the mentioned Professor take a call ?

#### George1

• Hero Member
• Posts: 884
##### Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #662 on: June 29, 2021, 02:22:27 PM »
To ramset.
--------------------------------
Hi ramset,
Hi dear colleague,
Thank you very much for your reply. Within a period at least two months your post is the first reasonable post, related to this topic. Please give us (our team) some time to consider carefully and thoroughly your text and answer all your questions in a proper manner. I will write to you in the nearest future.
Regards,

#### George1

• Hero Member
• Posts: 884
##### Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #663 on: June 30, 2021, 10:20:06 AM »
To ramset.
===================
Hi ramset,
Hi dear colleague,
Let us start our explanations. (All considerations in items 1 and 2 below have been experimentally proved within a period of 200 years. But despite of this let us consider again these basic axioms of standard electric engineering.)
----------------------------------
1) Assume that a standard SOLID conductor (a standard copper wire for example) is connected to a standard DC source (a standard fully-charged battery for example) thus forming a circuit. (This circuit is equipped with a standard ohmmeter and with a standard ammeter. Besides you have at your disposal a standard chronometer/clock.) Assume further that the Ohmic resistance R of the SOLID conductor is just equal to 1 Ohm. Assume also that current I of 1 A flows through the  SOLID conductor within a period of 1 second. The electric energy, consumed by the SOLID conductor, is just equal to 1 Joule and the heat, generated by the SOLID conductor, is equal to 1 Joule too. The last sentence is a manifestation of the so called first Joule's law of heating. The latter is taken for granted by any electric engineer in the world. No electric engineer in the world measures the generated heat of 1 Joule BY USING OF CALORIMETRY METHODS. Every electric engineer in the world takes for granted the generated heat of 1 Joule.
-----------------------------------
2) The same for any standard LIQUID conductor (electrolyte). Assume that a standard LIQUID conductor (a water solution of CuSO4 for example) is connected to a standard DC source (a standard fully-charged battery for example) thus forming a circuit. (This circuit is equipped with a standard ohmmeter and with a standard ammeter. Besides you have at your disposal a standard chronometer/clock.) Assume further that the Ohmic resistance R of the LIQUID conductor is just equal to 1 Ohm. Assume also that current I of 1 A flows through the LIQUID conductor within a period of 1 second. The electric energy, consumed by the LIQUID conductor, is just equal to 1 Joule and the heat, generated by the LIQUID conductor, is equal to 1 Joule too. The last sentence is a manifestation of the so called first Joule's law of heating. The latter is taken for granted by any electric engineer in the world. No electric engineer in the world measures the generated heat of 1 Joule BY USING OF CALORIMETRY METHODS. Every electric engineer in the world takes for granted the generated heat of 1 Joule.
------------------------------------
3) The question is: Is there any LIQUID conductor (electrolyte), for which the generated heat is not equal to 1 Joule, that is, is there any LIQUID conductor (electrolyte), for which the generated heat is either smaller or bigger than 1 Joule? In other words, is there any LIQUID conductor (electrolyte), for which the first Joule's law of heating is not valid?
------------------------------------
4) If you are an expert in electric engineering, then please answer personally the question, mentioned in previous item 3. If you are not an expert in electric engineering however, then please ask your team's experts in electric engineering the same question.
------------------------------------
(Note. It is extremely important to clarify together the question, mentioned in item 3 above, as it is one of the fundamentals of our concept.)
------------------------------------
5) After clarifying together the question, mentioned in item 3 above, we will proceed further with our next explanations, which will consist of one or two sentences only, and which will show you how to save electric energy in an extremely simple manner.
------------------------------------
Regards,

#### ramset

• Hero Member
• Posts: 7889
##### Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #664 on: June 30, 2021, 12:41:33 PM »
George
Seems I did a poor job asking the question,

Do you have test results from a working proof of concept ... or
Device ....

to show your simple claim of more power out that in ?

Can a viewing be arranged ( will you take a phone call ?)
To setup an independent lab investigation ?

Respectfully
Chet K
Ps
this is after all  an open source forum
And there are members who will help advance a true scientific anomaly!

#### George1

• Hero Member
• Posts: 884
##### Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #665 on: June 30, 2021, 02:31:13 PM »
To ramset.
======================
Hi ramset,
Good! Very good!
1) To set up an independent lab investigation. Perfectly agree with this.
2) This is after all  an open source forum. Yes, I agree. We will share entirely all details of our concept here in this forum.
3) There are members who will help advance a true scientific anomaly. Sounds good! We (our team) would be glad to co-operate with other new technology enthusiasts here in this forum.
4) I understood all your requirements. Please give me some more time to prepare and present here in this forum all our experimental results. I will write to you in the nearest future.
Regards,

#### George1

• Hero Member
• Posts: 884
##### Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #666 on: July 02, 2021, 08:53:45 AM »
To ramset.
===================
Hi ramset,
Hi dear colleague,
We (our team) are preparing now several texts, describing entirely several experiments of ours, respectively. We need some time. Please be patient, if possible.
Regards,

#### George1

• Hero Member
• Posts: 884
##### Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #667 on: July 03, 2021, 09:45:10 AM »
To ramset.
======================
Hi ramset,
Here is a detailed description of our first group of experiments.
======================
======================
EXPERIMENT 1.
1) A standard copper wire (a standard SOLID conductor) is connected to a standard DC source thus forming a circuit.
2) The circuit is equipped with a standard ammeter and with a standard ohmmeter. Besides we have at our disposal a standard chronometer.
3) The ammeter registers a current of 7.98 A.
4) The ohmmeter registers an Ohmic resistance of 0.5 Ohm.
5) The chronometer registers a time interval of 1 second. (A current of 7.98 A flows through a copper wire of Ohmic resistance of 0.5 Ohm within a period of 1 second.)
6) Using (a) the above three experimental results (7.98 A, 0.5 Ohm and 1 second) and (b) the first Joule's law of heating we can easily calculate that:
a) the electric energy, consumed by the copper wire, is just equal to 31.84 J;
b) the so called Joule's heat, generated by the copper wire, is just equal to 31.84 J too.
7) Please note that in order to get the amount of generated Joule's heat of 31.84 J we need solely and only (a) three experimental results (7.98 A, 0.5 Ohm and 1 second) and (b) three measuring devices (an ammeter, an ohmmeter and a chronometer). No electric engineer in the world would measure the generated heat of  31.84 J by using of calorimetry methods. Every electric engineer in the world would take for granted this generated heat of  31.84 J. Because otherwise he/she would accept the fact that the first Joule's law of heating (experimentally proved millions of times within a period of 200 years for any standard solid, liquid or gaseous conductor) is not valid.
=======================
=======================
EXPERIMENT 2.
1) A standard sulphuric acid solution (a standard LIQUID conductor/a standard electrolyte) is connected to a standard DC source thus forming a circuit.
2) The circuit is equipped with a standard ammeter and with a standard ohmmeter. Besides we have at our disposal a standard chronometer.
3) The ammeter registers a current of 7.98 A.
4) The ohmmeter registers an Ohmic resistance of 0.5 Ohm.
5) The chronometer registers a time interval of 1 second. (A current of 7.98 A flows through an electrolyte of Ohmic resistance of 0.5 Ohm within a period of 1 second.)
6) Using (a) the above three experimental results (7.98 A, 0.5 Ohm and 1 second) and (b) the first Joule's law of heating we can easily calculate that:
a) the electric energy, consumed by the electrolyte, is just equal to 31.84 J;
b) the so called Joule's heat, generated by the electrolyte, is just equal to 31.84 J too.
7) Please note that in order to get the amount of generated Joule's heat of 31.84 J we need solely and only (a) three experimental results (7.98 A, 0.5 Ohm and 1 second) and (b) three measuring devices (an ammeter, an ohmmeter and a chronometer). No electric engineer in the world would measure the generated heat of 31.84 J by using of calorimetry methods. Every electric engineer in the world would take for granted this generated heat of 31.84 J. Because otherwise he/she would accept the fact that the first Joule's law of heating (experimentally proved millions of times within a period of 200 years for any standard solid, liquid or gaseous conductor) is not valid.
-------------------------------------------
(Note. It is evident that the last items 1 - 7 of this Experiment 2 are absolutely identical to items 1 - 7 of previous Experiment 1. The latter is a clear manifestation of the first Joule' law of heating, which has been experimentally proved millions of times within a period of 200 years for any standard solid, liquid or gaseous conductor.)
-------------------------------------------
8/ While a current of 7.98 A flows through the electrolyte within a period of 1 second however a certain amount of hydrogen has been generated. The mass of the generated hydrogen is just equal to 0.0000000833112 kg as follows from the first Faraday's law of electrolysis.
9) Please note that in order to get the mass of the released hydrogen we need solely and only (a) two experimental results (7.98 A and 1 second) and (b) two related measuring devices (an ammeter and a chronometer). No expert in electrochemistry in the world would measure the mass of the generated hydrogen by using of balance, scales or any other weighing machine. Every expert in electrochemistry in the world would take for granted this mass of 0.0000000833112 kg. Because otherwise he/she would accept the fact that the first Faraday's law of electrolysis (experimentally proved millions of times within a period of 200 years) is not valid.
10) If we burn/explode the released hydrogen, then a certain amount of heat would be generated. And this heat would be just equal to 11.83 J . In other words, we can write down the equality
H = (HHV) x (m) = 11.83 J,
where
H = heat generated by burning/exploding of the released hydrogen
HHV = higher heating value of hydrogen = 142 MJ/kg
m = mass of the released hydrogen = 0.0000000833112 kg
11) Please note that no expert in thermodynamics in the world would measure the generated heat of 11.83 J by using of calorimetry methods. Every expert in thermodynamics in the world would take for granted this generated heat of 11.83 J. Because otherwise he/she would accept the fact that the value of the hydrogen's HHV (experimentally proved millions of times within a period of 200 years) is not valid.
12) In one word, on one hand we have a consumed electric energy of 31.84 J and this is the inlet energy. On the other hand we have (a) Joule's heat of 31.84 J and (b) heat H of 11.83 J, which is generated by burning/exploding of the released hydrogen. The sum of the two last pieces of energy is just equal to the outlet energy.
13) Therefore we can write down the inequalities
(31.84 J) + (11.83 J) > 31.84 J   <=>  43.67 J > 31.84 J  <=>  outlet energy > inlet energy.
14) For the efficiency/COP of the above described process we can write down the equality
efficiency = COP = (43.67 J)/(31.84 J) = 1.37
15) And it is evident that COP = 1.37  <=>  COP > 1.
==============================
==============================
SUMMARY.
1) The above experimental results for inlet and outlet energies are based on:
a) the readings of three standard measuring devices (an ammeter, an ohmmeter and a chronometer);
b) the validity of the first Joule's law of heating (experimentally proved millions of times within a period of 200 years for any standard solid, liquid or gaseous conductor);
c) the validity of the first Faraday's law of electrolysis (experimentally proved millions of times within a period of 200 years for any standard electrolyte);
d) the validity of the value of the hydrogen's HHV (experimentally proved millions of times within a period of 200 years).
2) In one word, having in mind the text above we can conclude that any of the millions (either industrial or laboratory) standard electrolyzers all over the world is actually a heater, which has COP/efficiency greater than 1.
-----------------------------------------------------
(Note. Any standard (either industrial or laboratory) electrolyzer could be designed as a built-with-fin-tubes (i.e. with extended-surfaces) heat exchanger. In this way there would be more emphasis on cramming more heat-transfer surfaces into less and less volume. This approach could be suitable for a better utilization of the released Joule's heat. Besides the same built-with-fin-tubes (i.e. with extended-surfaces) heat exchanger design could be used for the box/container, in which the burning of the released hydrogen would take place. In this way as if there would be a better utilization of the heat, generated by the burning of the released hydrogen.)
------------------------------------------------------
3) If the first Joule's law of heating and/or the first Faraday's law of electrolysis and/or the value of the hydrogen's HHV proved to be experimentally invalid, then this fact would lead to the creation of entirely new and revolutionary branch of science and technology. The latter would be a wonderful alternative too.
===============================
===============================
That's all about our first group of experiments.

#### George1

• Hero Member
• Posts: 884
##### Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #668 on: July 05, 2021, 10:47:41 AM »
To ramset.
======================
And here is a short description of our second group of experiments.
1) Actually our second group of experiments is absolutely identical to our first group of experiments (the latter being described in our previous post) with the only difference that Ohmic resistance is decreased 10 times and as a result the ohmmeter registers an Ohmic resistance of 0.05 Ohm. In this case:
a) the consumed electric energy is equal to 3.184 J;
b) the generated Joule's heat is equal to 3.184 J too;
c) the heat, generated by the burning/exploding of the released hydrogen, is equal to 11.83 J (which is just the same as in our first group of experiments),
2) So for efficiency/COP we can write down the equalities
COP = ((3.184 J) + (11.83 J))/(3.184 J)   <=>   COP = (15.014 J)/(3.184 J)   <=>   COP = 4.72
3) It is evident that
COP = 4.72   <=>    COP > 1.
4) In one word, (keeping constant current I and time period t) the smaller the Ohmic resistance R, the bigger the efficiency/COP.
----------------------------------------
----------------------------------------
P.S. We are working now over our third group of experiments and over the related descriptive text. But it is not an easy job. It will take some time.
« Last Edit: July 05, 2021, 03:10:39 PM by George1 »

#### ramset

• Hero Member
• Posts: 7889
##### Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #669 on: July 05, 2021, 11:33:14 PM »
George
The question simplified

Will your team give a demonstration at your location ( and allow measurements)??

Can you take a phone call to discuss this ?
Respectfully
Chet K

#### George1

• Hero Member
• Posts: 884
##### Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #670 on: July 06, 2021, 01:42:51 PM »
To ramset.
====================
Hi ramset,
1) Well, we (our team) will consider thoroughly and will think carefully over your suggestion for giving a demonstration at our location (and allow measurements, respectively).
2) If we agree with your suggestion, then what kind of experts (experts in what field of knowledge and expertise) would make the related measurements? And how many experts of yours would visit our laboratory?
3) Would your experts use our measuring devices or they would prefer to use their own measuring devices? (As mentioned in our previous posts the only necessary measuring devices are (a) a standard ammeter, (b) a standard ohmmeter and (c) a standard chronometer.)
4) How exactly would you suggest to realize a possible phone contact?
-------------------------------------
P. S. Wouldn't be much easier for you if you just copy the two groups of experiments as described in our previous posts? Use only a standard copper wire, a standard laboratory electrolyzer and only  three standard measuring devices (a standard ammeter, a standard ohmmeter and a standard chronometer), which you can use for measuring of (a) current of 1 A, (b) Ohmic resistance of 0.5 Ohm (and after that of 0.05 Ohm) and (c) a time interval of 1 second, respectively. Simple, easy and clear DIY experiments, that can be carried out even in your garage. Don't you think so?

#### George1

• Hero Member
• Posts: 884
##### Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #671 on: July 07, 2021, 02:39:48 PM »
To ramset.
=====================
1) All you need is:
a) a standard copper wire;
b) a standard laboratory electrolyzer;
c) a standard ammeter;
d) a standard ohmmeter;
e) a standard chronometer.
2) Using the above five simply carry out (just copy) the experiments, described in our previous posts of July 03, 2021, 09:45:10 AM and July 05, 2021, 10:47:41 AM
---------------------------------------
====================
P.S. About your suggestion for a possible phone contact between your team and our team. To exchange phone numbers directly here in this forum seems to be not a very good idea. Because as if not all members of this forum are honest persons of good will. Don't you think so?

#### ramset

• Hero Member
• Posts: 7889
##### Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #672 on: July 07, 2021, 10:03:18 PM »
Chetkremens@gmail.com

#### George1

• Hero Member
• Posts: 884
##### Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #673 on: July 08, 2021, 11:12:32 AM »
To ramset.
=====================
Thank you for sending me your email. Your suggestion for a possible phone contact will be discussed among our team. The discussion will take some time however.
=====================
Meanwhile you could carry out (even in your garage!) the simple experiments, described below.
--------------------------------------
1) All you need (as a technology equipment) is:
a) a standard copper wire;
b) a standard laboratory electrolyzer;
c) a standard ammeter;
d) a standard ohmmeter;
e) a standard chronometer.
--------------------------------------
2) All you need (as a group of qualified experts) is:
a) an expert in electric engineering (Ph.D.);
b) an expert in electrochemistry (Ph.D.);
c) an expert in thermodynamics (Ph.D.).
--------------------------------------
3) Having at your disposal (a) the above mentioned technology equipment and (b) the above mentioned group of experts simply carry out (just copy) the experiments, described in our previous posts of July 03, 2021, 09:45:10 AM and July 05, 2021, 10:47:41 AM.
---------------------------------------

#### ramset

• Hero Member
• Posts: 7889
##### Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #674 on: July 09, 2021, 04:34:01 PM »
Here an understanding of why I am here ( and many others)
A mission statement from your/our host ( Stefan Hartmann

When you are ready to talk ?

Let me know ,( but not about business , or investors or ?? this is wrong forum for that !)
Yes there are Angel Donors who would contribute to a scientifically vetted , world changing technology
Which would fit open source mission statement posted here!

Respectfully
Chet K