Re: try
From: Peter Lowrie (peterlowrie_at_consultant.com)
Date: 01/07/05
- Next message: William Mook: "Re: attn: William Mook - How is your company doing?"
- Previous message: Don Lancaster: "Re: try"
- In reply to: Don Lancaster: "Re: try"
- Next in thread: Don Lancaster: "Re: try"
- Reply: Don Lancaster: "Re: try"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 07 Jan 2005 20:57:53 +1300
Don Lancaster wrote:
> Adder wrote:
>>
>> In article <2031020.Gf2psaMvCI@xbox.pelnet.net> in nz.tech on Fri, 07 Jan
>> 2005 12:53:25 +1300, Peter Lowrie <peterlowrie@consultant.com> says...
>> > Richard Hector wrote:
>> > Contrary to what other detractors have stated there are no breakages of
any
>> > laws in the systems I've proposed.
>>
>> Shows you have no understanding of what those laws are.
Nonsense.
>> 1. The amount of energy stored in the hydrogen/oxygen gas that is
>> electrolysed will not be more than the energy required to electrolyse it
You are mistaken,I have provided the math.
>> 2. The amount of energy generated by combusting those gases in an engine
>> of whatever type will not exceed the energy stored in the gases before
>> combustion.
Again you are mistaken.
>> The conservation of energy theorem as I recall it states, in effect, that
Thought you said it was law, now you've downgraded it to theorem, very
clumsy of you.
>> when a conversion of energy from one form to another occurs, the final
>> form will not be greater than the input energies expended. As water of
>> itself does not contain any energy that can produce power in an engine,
>> there must necessarily be a release of that energy from electrolysis.
That you know of, all my efforts to put you straight are in vain. Water
contains energy, else how is it made?
>> I assume you're quoting from someone else's untested theorems rather than
>> your own efforts.
Hell no. I am grateful for my detractors since they have sent me scurrying
in pursuit of answers.
> The place to start is with Faraday himself.
> As found in Great Books #45.
> Faraday's Law ain't broke.
At last, a comment from Don that I agree with. Faradays laws are sacrosanct.
Are you aware of the Wein Effect - the means by which Ohms Law BREAKS! ?.
The trouble, though, with Faradays Law of electrolysis is that at peak
efficiencies it is endothermic however this state cannot be attained for
any length of time, the electrolyte cools down too much and the voltage has
to be increased awhile to warm it up.
> More details at http://www.tinaja.com/glib/muse153.pdf
Muses ain't facts.
Following the logic of the subject feild, it is better to try and fail than
to NOT try and succeed. Indeed all of the work I have put into this project
has taught me NOT to stop at the first explaination that appears plausible.
I was roundly criticised for asserting that Ohms Law breaks, until I
explained the Wein Effect and then everybody shut up. Good eh!
-Peter
- Next message: William Mook: "Re: attn: William Mook - How is your company doing?"
- Previous message: Don Lancaster: "Re: try"
- In reply to: Don Lancaster: "Re: try"
- Next in thread: Don Lancaster: "Re: try"
- Reply: Don Lancaster: "Re: try"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
