Re: Colonizing the Galaxy in Eight Easy Steps

From: Zaphod \ (zaphodB_at_safe-mail.net)
Date: 06/13/04 

Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 23:11:02 -0500

"michael" <copsR@yourdoor.com> wrote in message
news:40cbd04b_1@news.iprimus.com.au...
> : "Albert" mailto:alwagner@tcac.net says:
> >
> > Quibbler is correct. And you are wrong. It is the difference in
> > pressure between the input and exhaust that allows work to be done. The
> > greater the difference the more work. Condensing the waste steam at the
> > exhaust increases the pressure differential and hence increases the
> > efficiency.
>
> Yes Albert, it *is* the difference in pressure between
> the input and exhaust that does the work.
>
> So we have now reduced the input to 0.5 STP to
> make it easier to boil. So lets say the condensation
> reduces the pressure at exhaust to, say, 0.25 STP.
>
> How have we gained anything over your common or
> garden variety turbines where the energy input into
> the chamber increases pressure to above STP
> with the exhaust operating at STP?
>
> Or to simplify the question to a point where even a
> fan of Savage may understand it - what makes
> (0.50 - 0.25) bigger than (1.25 - 1.0)?
>
> Its the energy coming into the system that produces
> the pressure gradient to do the work. Not the starting
> pressure of the input chamber.
>
> And what is feeding energy into the input chamber
> in the first place? If we are feeding STP 80 degree
> seawater in, what is keeping the input pressure down.
> You can't condense it all away to zero you know (and
> its coming in condensed in the first place).
>
> Hence my reducto ad absurdum. If a turbine operating at
> less than STP can produce more energy for less input
> that one operating at STP, surely one operating at zero
> pressure can produce unlimited energy out for zero energy in.
>
> Or for the utter scientific illiterates who take Savage seriously ...
>
> Has it occured to any of Savage's fans that there may
> actually be a reason that none of the regular steam turbine
> generators used the world over run at lower than STP?
> Surely if there was anything to be gained here, some
> engineer just may have twigged to it by now. Maybe its
> a conspiracy by those of us who have actually bothered
> to learn something about physics (e.g. the mechanical
> and structural consulting engineer who reviewed Savage
> at http://tinyurl.com/36hwy ) to hide our slow wittedness.
>
> However I note that a 14 year old (who presumably
> has not begun to learn basic physics yet) found the
> book "well written enough for me to understand completely".
>
> Am I talking to anyone older than 14 here?
>
> michael
>

Beats the *** out of me Michael but I'll say one thing. I would be very
hard pressed to dispute any of the points you have made so far. I'll be
interested to see what the reply will be.

Zaphod