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

Plug Heater

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: 508944
  • *Total Topics: 15176
  • *Online Today: 44
  • *Most Online: 103
(December 19, 2006, 11:27:19 PM)
  • *Users: 3
  • *Guests: 6
  • *Total: 9

Author Topic: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1  (Read 20491 times)

Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3915
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #90 on: April 15, 2019, 06:54:41 PM »
Hi George,

Well, if you repeat an experiment and presumably measure a few things, it is desirable to include some more details besides you have given in the above text. 

I think of, for instance, the DC voltage amplitude and the measured current you had to provide for 20 minute, you wrote nothing about these. 
This involves using either a separate voltage and a current meter like two DMMs or perhaps such meters are built into a DC power supply if you used such type.

A glass bodied mercury thermometer merged into the electrolyte or say the use of an infra thermometer is also missing from your report: it would be more convincing you check temperature of the electrolyte, after stirring up the electrolyte a little to insure more or less equal temperature for the whole quantity inside the container. 

One more question: how did you measure the electrolyte had indeed 0.5 Ohm resistance between the 2 electrodes?

It would also be good to see your setup in one or two snapshot pictures taken any time within the 20 minute long operating time. The pictures would show the meters together with the glass container and its electrodes.
 By the way what material the two electrodes you use are made of?
The inclusion of these all would be a bit more scientific than your written text.

Now comes the most important question: how do you know the quantity of the liberated hidrogen during your test was pretty close enough to 100 mg what the Professor calculated in his textbook example (what he gave as an exercise for his students)? 
You or we know nothing about the test circumstances the Professor had for his example regarding how the electrolyte temperature hence the 0.5 Ohm resistance changed. (It is obvious that from the students point of view the circumstances of such tests are irrelevant, they are 'happy' to use a math formula and calculate say the input power to solve the question.)
You may say I am nit-picking with you but I am not: all these are valid details and questions that such experiment, once performed, should include in a report.  I mean not specifically reporting for me but for the scientific world whenever someone claims an unusual statement.  It is not me who doubts any COP > 1 result here but those professors, MS and Ph 'Doctors' who have already missed this recognition (a 'simple' ego question) you seem to have figured out so they simply will want to fully neglect you unless you show rock stable measurement results. 

And as I already said if a new electric heater is to be produced and marketed, operating on your idea, then specifications for such heater should be provided, from which any higher efficiency than that of the other heaters already on the market should clearly turn out.  Till this is not proved by measurements your claim remains a claim however the common sense or logics suggests otherwise. 
I am still interested in the titles and authors of those scientific papers you have referred to if you do not mind.

Gyula

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy


Offline George1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 183
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #91 on: April 16, 2019, 11:14:53 AM »
Hi Gyula,
Thanks a lot for your reply.
1) Yes, we perfectly agree with all you have written in your last post. We will do our best to fulfil all of your requirements. But it will take some time because our access to  the high-tech laboratory, in which we carry out experiments, is a little difficult.   
2) Meanwhile I am sending to you some interesting links as you asked in your yesterday post.
2A) http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/electrolysis.html 
This link describes the basic postulates of water-splittig electrolysis. It confirms the validity of our COP > 1 concept.
2B) https://calistry.org/calculate/faradayLawElectrolysis
This link allows to calculate easily the amount of the generated hydrogen by using the experimental data for current I, time t and electrochemical equivalent Z of hydrogen. We used this approach in our experiments without weighing the generated hydrogen.
2C) http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1516-14392014000100012
This link contains ready experimental data, which confirm again the validity of our COP > 1. Why don't we use ready experimental data instead of performing again experiments that have been already performed?
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
George

Offline George1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 183
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #92 on: April 16, 2019, 04:48:29 PM »
Hi again Gyula,
And one more 81-pages research experimental work:
http://www.esru.strath.ac.uk/Documents/MSc_2003/papagiannakis_i.pdf
Ready experimental results, confirming COP > 1. Why don't we use them?
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
George

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #92 on: April 16, 2019, 04:48:29 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline George1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 183
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #93 on: April 19, 2019, 10:05:11 AM »
To Gyula and to all other guys who are interested in the topic.
---------------------------
One question.
1) Imagine that an AC or a DC voltage source is connected to a standard resistor of ohmic resistanse R. (The resistor is either solid or liquid or gaseous or some combination of the three.)
2) The AC/DC voltage source generates electric energy of 180,000,000 J.
3) The question is what is the Joule's heat generated by the resistor? Is it possible this Joule's heat to be equal to 60,000,000 J? Or to 40,000,000 J?
4) In the case of the liquid resistor (electrolyte) the AC/DC source's voltage is much bigger than the electrode potential and overvoltage and the latter can be neglected.
5) Let us remind again that the Joule's heat law directly derives from the Ohm's law and vice versa, that is,
V = I x R  (1)  <=>  V x I x t = I x I x R x t  (2)
where
V is voltage;
I is current;
R is ohmic resistance;
t is time.
(Note. We simply multiply by (I x t) both sides of equality (1) in order to get equality (2).)
(Note. In the AC case we consider the effective values of voltage and current.)
6) So let us repeat the question. If the AC/DC voltage source generates electric energy of 180,000,000 J, then what is the Joule's heat generated by the resistor? Is it possible this Joule's heat to be equal to 60,000,000 J? Or to 40,000,000 J?
---------------------
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
George

 

Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3915
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #94 on: April 19, 2019, 10:28:38 PM »
Hi again Gyula,
And one more 81-pages research experimental work:
http://www.esru.strath.ac.uk/Documents/MSc_2003/papagiannakis_i.pdf
Ready experimental results, confirming COP > 1. Why don't we use them?
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
George
Well, the author of that work used a Proton Exchange Membrane, do you have such device?  The thesis surely includes useful pieces of information, no doubt. 

George,  reading several of your posts, you seem to do quasi everything to convince members  or readers "logically"  that all the work have already been done earlier and you try to imply in most of your 'mathematical' answers that no need to do further tests.

I understand that it is hard to do correct tests, it needs time and resources for sure and as I wrote much earlier, I do not urge you.  I just try to keep you on a 'scientific' track from which you are often attempt wandering off.   ::)

But obviously, you can do it on your own way.  My take on your claim is that it is possible but until not proved by correct measurements, it is just a claim.  Such is science.

Gyula



Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #94 on: April 19, 2019, 10:28:38 PM »
Sponsored links:




Offline George1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 183
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #95 on: April 20, 2019, 10:06:52 AM »
Hi Gyula,
Thanks a lot for your reply.
1) Yes, I perfectly agree with you. Yes, we tried to shortcut the path to the target, but you are right that this is not the correct approach. We will do these experiments trying to be in a constant touch with you for consultations and recommendations.
2) We have to see if it is possible to find somewhere here such a PEM electrolyzer and consider it carefully.
I will write to you in the nearest future.
Regrds,
George
--------------------
P. S. By the way do you have some friend/colleague who is an expert in the field of computer simulation of real mechanical systems? I will be extremely grateful to you if you find for me such an expert. Looking forward to your answer.
   

Offline George1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 183
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #96 on: April 20, 2019, 10:19:50 AM »
Hi again Gyua.
Only a small addition to the P. S. of my last post. The expert must be able to do things similar to the ones that are shown in the links below:
https://www.myphysicslab.com/springs/collide-spring-en.html
https://www.myphysicslab.com/springs/dangle-stick-en.html
https://www.myphysicslab.com/springs/collide-blocks-en.html
https://www.myphysicslab.com/
Please help, if possible.
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
George

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #96 on: April 20, 2019, 10:19:50 AM »
Sponsored links:




Offline George1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 183
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #97 on: April 22, 2019, 08:43:40 AM »
Hi Gyula.
Two members of our team seriously undertake to perform the water-splitting experiments. It will take some time however.
-------------------
While waiting for the experimental results let us recapitulate again all theoretical (ONLY THEORETICAL!) considerations until now.
-------------------
1) A standard DC voltage source of voltage V is connected to a standard solid resistor of ohmic resistance R. We can write down the following equalities:
V = I x R  (1)  <=>  V x I x t = I x I x R x t  (2)
where
V is the voltage of the DC source;
I is the current flowing through the resistor;
R is the ohmic resistance of the resistor;
t is time.
Simple and clear.
-------------------
2) The situation changes a little however if we replace the solid resistor of ohmic resistance R with a liquid resistor (electrolyte) of the same ohmic resistance R. In this case we have to adapt a little equalities (1) and (2). We can write down the following equalities and inequalities:
V - v = (I - i) x R  (3)  <=>  (V - v) x (I - i) x t = (I - i) x (I - i) x R x t  (4)  <=>  (V - v) x (I - i) x t < ((I - i) x (I - i) x R x t) + (Z x (I -i) x t x (LHV))  (5) <=>
<=>  V -v < ((I -i) x R) + (Z x (LHV))  (6)  <=>  0 < Z x (LHV)  (7)  <=>  0 < 1.2  (8)
where
v is the "counter-voltage" due to electrode potential/overvoltage; (V - v) is practically equal to V because v is much smaller than V and can be neglected;
i is the current decrease due to v; (I - i) is practically equal to I because i is much smaller than I and can be neglected;
Z is the electrochemical equivalent of hydrogen; Z = 0.00000001 C/kg;
LHV is the lower heating value of hydrogen; LHV = 1.2 x 100000000 J/kg.
--------------------
The "magic":) inequality (8) unambiguously shows COP > 1. Do you have any theoretical (ONLY THEORETICAL!) objections against inequality (8)?
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
George
   

Offline George1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 183
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #98 on: April 22, 2019, 08:46:48 AM »
Hi Gyula.
Two members of our team seriously undertake to perform the water-splitting experiments. It will take some time however.
-------------------
While waiting for the experimental results let us recapitulate again all theoretical (ONLY THEORETICAL!) considerations until now.
-------------------
1) A standard DC voltage source of voltage V is connected to a standard solid resistor of ohmic resistance R. We can write down the following equalities:
V = I x R  (1)  <=>  V x I x t = I x I x R x t  (2)
where
V is the voltage of the DC source;
I is the current flowing through the resistor;
R is the ohmic resistance of the resistor;
t is time.
Simple and clear.
-------------------
2) The situation changes a little however if we replace the solid resistor of ohmic resistance R with a liquid resistor (electrolyte) of the same ohmic resistance R. In this case we have to adapt a little equalities (1) and (2). We can write down the following equalities and inequalities:
V - v = (I - i) x R  (3)  <=>  (V - v) x (I - i) x t = (I - i) x (I - i) x R x t  (4)  <=>  (V - v) x (I - i) x t < ((I - i) x (I - i) x R x t) + (Z x (I -i) x t x (LHV))  (5) <=>
<=>  V -v < ((I -i) x R) + (Z x (LHV))  (6)  <=>  0 < Z x (LHV)  (7)  <=>  0 < 1.2  (8)
where
v is the "counter-voltage" due to electrode potential/overvoltage; (V - v) is practically equal to V because v is much smaller than V and can be neglected;
i is the current decrease due to v; (I - i) is practically equal to I because i is much smaller than I and can be neglected;
Z is the electrochemical equivalent of hydrogen; Z = 0.00000001 C/kg;
LHV is the lower heating value of hydrogen; LHV = 1.2 x 100000000 J/kg.
--------------------
The "magic" inequality (8) unambiguously shows COP > 1. Do you have any theoretical (ONLY THEORETICAL!) objections against inequality (8)?
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
George

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #98 on: April 22, 2019, 08:46:48 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline George1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 183
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #99 on: April 22, 2019, 08:58:10 AM »
Hi Gyula.
Two members of our team seriously undertake to perform the water-splitting experiments. It will take some time however.
-------------------
While waiting for the experimental results let us recapitulate again all theoretical (ONLY THEORETICAL!) considerations until now.
-------------------
1) A standard DC voltage source of voltage V is connected to a standard solid resistor of ohmic resistance R. We can write down the following equalities:
V = I x R  (1)  <=>  V x I x t = I x I x R x t  (2)
where
V is the voltage of the DC source;
I is the current flowing through the resistor;
R is the ohmic resistance of the resistor;
t is time.
Simple and clear.
-------------------
2) The situation changes a little however if we replace the solid resistor of ohmic resistance R with a liquid resistor (electrolyte) of the same ohmic resistance R. In this case we have to adapt a little equalities (1) and (2). We can write down the following equalities and inequalities:
V - v = (I - i) x R  (3)  <=>  (V - v) x (I - i) x t = (I - i) x (I - i) x R x t  (4)  <=>  (V - v) x (I - i) x t < ((I - i) x (I - i) x R x t) + (Z x (I -i) x t x (LHV))  (5) <=>
<=>  V -v < ((I -i) x R) + (Z x (LHV))  (6)  <=>  0 < Z x (LHV)  (7)  <=>  0 < 1.2 (8)
where
v is the "counter-voltage" due to electrode potential/overvoltage; (V - v) is practically equal to V because v is much smaller than V and can be neglected;
i is the current decrease due to v; (I - i) is practically equal to I because i is much smaller than I and can be neglected;
Z is the electrochemical equivalent of hydrogen; Z = 0.00000001 C/kg;
LHV is the lower heating value of hydrogen; LHV = 1.2 x 100000000 J/kg.
--------------------
The "magic" inequality 0 < 1.2 (8) unambiguously shows COP > 1. Do you have any theoretical (ONLY THEORETICAL!) objections against inequality 0 < 1.2 (8)?
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
George

Offline George1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 183
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #100 on: April 22, 2019, 08:59:39 AM »
I don't know why my last post was sent three times in a row. It's not my fault.
George

Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #100 on: April 22, 2019, 08:59:39 AM »
3D Solar Panels

Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3915
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #101 on: April 22, 2019, 03:41:14 PM »
Hi George,

First I need to draw attention to a typo, you wrote Z = 0.00000001 C/kg but the dimension is kg/C, ok?

I already wrote in my Reply #70 that the correct formula would be VxIxt = H (or  IxIxRxt = H) where the left hand side is input energy and the right hand side is the heat from the burning Hydrogen + the created heat in the electrolyte (the latter two heat quantities are the total output energy).
And here with these equations VxIxt = H (or IxIxRxt = H) we assume the law of the conservation of energy is valid as an initial condition. 
AND whether this equation VxIxt = H (or IxIxRxt = H)  becomes an inequality like either VxIxt < H (or IxIxRxt < H) to give COP > 1 or VxIxt > H (or IxIxRxt > H) to give COP < 1,  it can only be answered by measurements. (For simplicity, I omitted counter voltage and current, v and i from the formulas.)

No need to deal with theoretical considerations in this case. I already mentioned also that your idea is good, and common sense would readily suggest a COP > 1 result. BUT common sense is not science.

Gyula

Offline George1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 183
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #102 on: April 23, 2019, 10:10:16 AM »
Hi Gyula.
Thank you for your reply.
1) Yes, common sense is not science. Correct! We keep performing experiments. It will take some time.
2) But if equation V x I x t = I x I x R x t = H is correct, then what happens with Joule' s heat? Where does it go? Does it disapper somewhere or what? Curious to know. Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
George   

Offline gyulasun

  • without_ads
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3915
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #103 on: April 23, 2019, 12:15:27 PM »
Hi George,

Please read my previous post (or my earlier reply #70) what I wrote I had meant on H:

"... is the heat from the burning Hydrogen + the created heat in the electrolyte (the latter two heat quantities are the total output energy)". 

So the Joule heat from the electrolyte does not dissappear of course. And I can only repeat the rest of what I wrote too:

"And here with these equations VxIxt = H (or IxIxRxt = H) we assume the law of the conservation of energy is valid as an initial condition.
AND whether this equation VxIxt = H (or IxIxRxt = H)  becomes an inequality like either VxIxt < H (or IxIxRxt < H) to give COP > 1 or VxIxt > H (or IxIxRxt > H) to give COP < 1,  it can only be answered by measurements. (For simplicity, I omitted counter voltage and current, v and i from the formulas.)"   

This is all that can comment on your theoretical math questions now and in the future.

Gyula


Offline George1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 183
Re: A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1
« Reply #104 on: April 24, 2019, 10:06:17 AM »
Hi Gyula.
Thank you for your reply. Perfect explanations! I understand everything.
----------------------------
Let me report what are we doing now.
We are intensively performing now a set of experiments just in accordance with your instructions. But the experiments generate another new question and WE NEED HELP TO INTERPRET THE RELATED EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS which again coincide with our theoretical concept. And here is this new question. (Actually this is an old idea of ours which we check up in the course of experiments and which has even one more additional and more sophisticated variation. The latter will be revealed in future posts, if necessary.) 
----------------------------
1) In accordance with your last post let us assume hypothetically that equality V x I x t = (I x I x R x t) + (Z x I x t x (LHV)) is valid.
2) And now let us decrease n times voltage V where R = const and n > 1. This inevitably leads to decreasing of I n times too. In one word, we have now voltage (V/n) and current (I/n) where (V/n) is still bigger than v and (I/n) is still bigger than i. Therefore BASED ON EXPERIMENTAL DATA we can write down the following equality and the related inequality:
V x I x t = (I x I x R x t) + (Z x I x t x (LHV))  <=> (V/n) x (I/n) x t < ((I/n) x (I/n) x R x t) + (Z x (I/n) x t x (LHV)).
The last inequality unambiguously shows again that COP > 1.
So you see that an entirely different approach leads again to the same final result which is again COP > 1.
---------------------------
What is your opinion?
Looking forward to your answer.
George         

 

OneLink