Hi tinu,
You are trying to manipulate all of us here in this forum -- you are trying to convince us that black is white. But you are not a skillful manipulator. You have to read still more books related to the art of manipulation. I will not argue with you.
George

Hi tinu,
First of all please excuse me if I have insulted you in some way. I am really sorry about this.
=================
Ok, let us follow your rules.
------------------------------
Given:
V = 2 Volts
v = - 1.23 Volts
R = 1 Ohm
I = (V - v)/R = (2 - 1.23)/1 = 0.77 Ampere
t = 1 second
Z = 0.00000001044 kg/C
Hydrogen HHV = 142000000 J/kg
Hydrogen LHV = 120000000 J/kg
-----------------------------
inlet energy = (2 Volts) x (0.77 Ampere) x (1 second) = 1.54 Joules
-----------------------------
outlet energy 1 = (0.77 Ampere) x (0.77 Ampere) x (1 Ohm) x (1 second) = 0.5929 Joules
-----------------------------
outlet energy 2 = (0.00000001044 kg/C) x (0.77 Ampere) x (1 second) x (142000000 J/kg) = 1.1415 Joules
-----------------------------
COP = (outet energy 1 + outlet energy 2)/inlet energy = (1.1415 Joules + 0.5929 Joules)/1.54 Joules = 1.1262  <=>
<=> COP = 1.1262  <=>  COP > 1.
-----------------------------
In the above solution we use hydrogen's HHV. If we use hydrogen's LHV, then COP will be equal to 1.01, that is, COP = 1.01  <=> COP > 1.
Of course it is aways better to use hydrogen's HHV instead of hydrogen's LHV. We have a choice.
-----------------------------
So you see that COP again is bigger than 1, that is, we have again COP > 1.
-----------------------------
Looking forward to your answer.
George


     
 

Hi tinu,
I am also sorry, but you are again entirely wrong. It seems to me that you are not reading at all any of our posts. Besides in one of your comments for example you claim that A is bigger than B and in the next comment of yours you claim just the opposite -- that A is smaller than B. And similar false claims and logical inconsistensies in all of your comments. Do you do this deliberately?
Please understand and accept the simple fact: there are physical processes which have COP > 1.
I am tired of explaining one and same simple thing thousands of times already.
George       

Hi lancaIV,
Thank you for your reply.
Good analysis, dear colleague. Would you be so polite to give us some time to consider carefully your last post?
I will write to you in the nearest future.
Regards,
George
 

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

Hi George1,

This post is a blatant lie!
The cited paper speaks of efficiency measured between 73-84% (page 72). There is nowhere any mention about COP>1!
Why do you lie, George?
Who gave you the right to come here, lie and insult members?
Again, asking for second time, what exactly is your training and level of expertise?

@George1

Given that the electrolyte container is well insulated.

1. When we electrolyze water into hydrogen and oxygen, heat is generated in the water.  The temperature of the electrolyte rises.

2. If the electrolyte is well insulated, caloric losses through its container will be minimal. 
    Those caloric losses / their rate can be measured.

3. The volume of the electrolyte decreases during electrolysis ..
           a. because water is transformed into H and O and leaves the electrolyte during the electrolysis.
           b. because water vapor leaves the electrolyte during the electrolysis.

4. The H,  the O and the water vapor all have a caloric content which they carry away from the electrolyte. 
           a. Specific calories were generated by the electrolysis process. 
           b. The transport of those calories from the electrolyte, cools the electrolyte.
           c. Those calories are still present, but they are within the water vapor and HHO gasses.

5. What is the temperature of the Water vapor / HHO gas mixture that is produced during electrolysis ?
Answer 1. It has the same temperature as does the electrolyte, at the time of it's escape from the electrolyte.
Answer 2. Its temperature will increase with time / as the temperature of the electrolyte also increases during electrolysis.

6. If the Water vapor / HHO gas mixture is well insulated, caloric losses through its container will be minimal. 
    Those caloric losses / their rate can be measured.

7. water vapor does not burn. 
    HHO will burn.

8. Water (water vapor) can be removed / trapped by freezing (passing it through a long cold tube).  The HHO
will not the freeze / be trapped.

9. The temperature of the water vapor before its separation from the HHO and the volume of the water (which we determine after
its separation from the HHO) informs us of the waters caloric content upon its production.  This caloric content was generated by the electrolysis (allowing for
initial electrolyte temperature) and should be added to the caloric increase of the electrolyte.

10. Before combustion, the temperature of the HHO should be raised to the temperature it had when it was first generated / released from the electrolyte.

               best wishes

To lancaIV
----------------------
About the 81-pages experimental work -- please read my last post to tinu.
----------------------
Here are our answers to your penultimate post.
1) About eta -- you mean eta = Energy conversion efficiency, I guess. Well, this eta is actually an artificially created item, more or less. Of course in some cases its application is extremely suitable and convenient and there is no doubt about this. But in general the eta-based principle as if does not work properly. For example please consider a simple copper wire in an air environment (in your room) through which flows electric current. The wire generates only Joule's heat. The latter is transmitted in two ways -- the wire directly heats the surrounding air and at the same time generates infrared radiation which heats the surrounding objects like table, chairs, walls, carpets, etc. In this case (and in other many cases too) the transmission of energy from the heater to the surrounding environment gives eta = 100 %.
2) Important is the ratio outlet energy/inlet energy and it doesn't matter how would you call it -- COP, efficiency, etc.) 
3) About the mass-surplus. Well, there isn't any mass-surplus at all. The quantity of the generated mass strictly obeys the first Faraday's law of electrolysis.
4) About the Nernst–Planck equation. Official scientific community and conventional orthodox scientists of any ranks do their best to avoid discussing a simple obvious fact -- the Einstein's theory of relativity and Max Planck's quantum mechanics CANNOT BE TRUE SUMULTANEOUSLY. Actually, let us directly say this, these two theories are two naive hypotheses, which generate more questions than answers and all of their postulates and mathematical costructions are questionable, doubtful and unreliable. These two hypotheses clearly illustrate the severe impotence of modern orthodox science.
5) And at last one small appeal for help. I see that you are an expert in the field of physics. So would you be so polite to have a look at the other topic of ours which is called "IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE"? How to calculate force Fc and deceleration d? And how would the system behave if the blue component's mass is BIGGER THAN/EQUAL TO/SMALLER THAN the black component's mass?
Looking forward to your answer.
Regards,
George