Home made energy converter.

Web site R744 needs hear from you urgent ."CO2 cooling cannot be done by an expansion chamber."

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You and science don't really get along, do you.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Web site R744 not for you then!, Ok how about NASA they have been getting it wrong for even longer!


"Man will never reach the moon regardless of all future scientific advances."

-- Dr. Lee DeForest, "Father of Radio & Grandfather of Television."


"The bomb will never go off. I speak as an expert in explosives."
- - Admiral William Leahy , US Atomic Bomb Project


"There is no likelihood man can ever tap the power of the atom."
-- Robert Millikan, Nobel Prize in Physics, 1923


"Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5 tons."
-- Popular Mechanics, forecasting the relentless march of science, 1949


"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."
-- Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943

"I have traveled the length and breadth of this country and talked with the best people, and I can assure you that data processing is a fad that won't last out the year."
--The editor in charge of business books for Prentice Hall, 1957


"But what is it good for?"
-- Engineer at the Advanced Computing Systems Division of IBM, 1968, commenting on the microchip.


"640K ought to be enough for anybody."
-- Bill Gates, 1981

This 'telephone'has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered as a means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us,"
-- Western Union internal memo, 1876.


"The wireless music box has no imaginable commercial value. Who would pay for a message sent to nobody in particular?"
-- David Sarnoff's associates in response to his urgings for investment in the radio in the 1920s.


"The concept is interesting and well-formed, but in order to earn better than a 'C,' the idea must be feasible,"
-- A Yale University management professor in response to Fred Smith's paper proposing reliable overnight delivery service. (Smith went on to found Federal Express Corp.)

"I'm just glad it'll be Clark Gable who's falling on his face and not Gary Cooper,"
--Gary Cooper on his decision not to take the leading role in "Gone With The Wind."


"A cookie store is a bad idea. Besides, the market research reports say America likes crispy cookies, not soft and chewy cookies like you make,"
-- Response to Debbi Fields' idea of starting Mrs. Fields' Cookies.


"We don't like their sound, and guitar music is on the way out,"
-- Decca Recording Co. rejecting the Beatles, 1962.


"Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible,"
-- Lord Kelvin, president, Royal Society, 1895.


"If I had thought about it, I wouldn't have done the experiment.
The literature was full of examples that said you can't do this,"
- - Spencer Silver on the work that led to the unique adhesives for 3-M "Post-It" Notepads.


"Drill for oil? You mean drill into the ground to try and find oil? You're crazy,"
-- Drillers who Edwin L. Drake tried to enlist to his project to drill for oil in 1859.


"Stocks have reached what looks like a permanently high plateau."
-- Irving Fisher, Professor of Economics, Yale University , 1929.


"Airplanes are interesting toys but of no military value,"
-- Marechal Ferdinand Foch, Professor of Strategy, Ecole Superieure de Guerre , France .


"Everything that can be invented has been invented,"
-- Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, US Office of Patents, 1899.

"The super computer is technologically impossible. It would take all of the water that flows over Niagara Falls to cool the heat generated by the number of vacuum tubes required."
-- Professor of Electrical Engineering, New York University


"I don't know what use any one could find for a machine that would make copies of documents. It certainly couldn't be a feasible business by itself."
-- the head of IBM, refusing to back the idea, forcing the inventor to found Xerox.


"Louis Pasteur's theory of germs is ridiculous fiction."
-- Pierre Pachet, Professor of Physiology at Toulouse , 1872


"The abdomen, the chest, and the brain will forever be shut from the intrusion of the wise and humane surgeon,"
-- Sir John Eric Ericksen, British surgeon, appointed Surgeon-Extraordinary to Queen Victoria 1873.


And last but not least...

"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home."
-- Ken Olson, president, chairman and founder of Digital Equipment Corp., 1977

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

deforest did not invent radio, he invented the triode vacuum tube.

at the time there were no such thing as an expert on nuclear detonations.

these 2 statements were made based on the "time share" method of computing.
one giant computer that served thousands.
the last statement was made before the invention of the transistor.
to add further perpective, the "4 banger" calculator you have is on a par with the computing capability of the time these statements were made.
a 4 banger calculator has only +, - , /, X , =

and it would be for brute problem solving.
as a programmer i can tell you for a fact that at least 50% of code is for human convenience.
but hey, i get your point.
i patiently await your invention of the worlds first frictionless refrigeration unit!!!
i should use "lossless" instead because i'm positive you will not consider liquid turbulence as friction.
even the very act of liquid flowing through a hose or pipe creates friction.
i'm sure you got a handle on it though.

 

NASA gets it right quite often, because they understand the science of thermodynamics. That's why their spacecraft/aircraft work - and why they don't pursue over-unity machines.

Your time might be better spent studying basic thermo than cutting and pasting other people's work.

 

But its NASA I learnt from!

 

leopold.

Not me, not my thing! "i patiently await your invention of the worlds first frictionless refrigeration unit!!!"

 

You are misinterpreting what they are saying. That's why a background in basic thermo might help you better understand the issues.

 

No! Reckon NASA have a basic thermo understanding possibly a nudge more.

 

post a link to this "R744" website.

 

Type in R744, then press enter!

 

The total amount of energy (ideally) in such a device is R[(nT)[sub]high[/sub]-(nT)[sub]low[/sub]], where n is number of moles and R is the universal gas constant. With only one energy source, the difference is zero.

That's what Das Energy is proposing. He's got a device that magically spins a turbine and generates electricity, even though the "engine" is nothing more than an unplugged refrigeration unit.

 

We all agree that you can pressurize CO2, expand it into an evaporator, and produce cooling. That will cost you energy.

For the umpteenth time, you can not dissipate heat into the cool spot you create and use this to generate work/energy/turn a turbine/generate electricity. In other words, you can not charge a refrigerator, and leave it unplugged, and continue to use it to produce cooling. The cool spot will simply warm up to room temperature. You certainly can not sink heat into the cool spot, in order to turn a turbine. It will just sit there and do nothing.

You have convinced yourself of a very common error, one that first year science students are frequently asked to explain in homework and in exams.

Your idea is very old, very well known, and a classic example of substituting science with guesswork. All you need to know is the formula I gave above. The maximum energy available in a heat engine is equal to the number of hot moles of working fluid-times the high temperature, minus the number of cool moles-times the lower temp; that quantity, multiplied by the universal gas constant, is the maximum available energy. (Note: temp in Kelvins and energy in Joules).

It simply means what was said on pages 1 & 2 of this thread, and what has been repeated over and over again since: If one of your reservoirs is at ambient, you need a second reservoir at some other temp (higher or lower than ambient). The only thing that powers a heat engine is the difference in energy of the two reservoirs. This is true in general for all machines. They require a potential difference in energy in order to to work. You will never escape this simple fact, no matter how hard you kick and scream.

There is no over unity device. There is no extraction of energy from a machine, in order to power itself. All of the hope in the world will not repeal the laws of nature.

 

Still no!, but your getting warmer.

 

No, your refrigerator is getting warmer. You are left out in the cold. Come into science, and warm your brain cells to the vast amount of information that heats and chills the world, and keeps things turning. You're ideas are frozen at Chapter 1. Toss your errors in the fire and let nature melt the ice between your ears.

You will never be able to do more than cross your arms like a child and pout "No!" until you crack a book and start learning some high school level science. Again:

E[sub]max[/sub] = PV = nRT = (nRT)[sub]high[/sub] - (nRT)[sub]low[/sub] = R [ (nT)[sub]high[/sub] - (nT)[sub]low[/sub] ] . . . you need to supply two energy sources to any machine, even if one of them is ambient air, ground, or water. (The cooler one is usually called a sink).

 

Dont have a refrigerator! "No, your refrigerator is getting warmer."

 

i can't, for the life of me, imagine where these people get this stuff.
i can't see even a theoretical way of getting over unity.
the closest i can come is unity and that would be a spinning gyroscope magnetically levitated in a perfect vacuum.
the moment you tried to extract power from it the device would become less than unity

 

I suppose it comes from a wish to conquer all of our hardships related to getting energy, coupled with an idea that everyone is telling him is wrong, coupled with the belief that this universal admonition to "not go there" must be the "barrier" that is preventing a breakthrough in science. Therefore (he must conclude) "by continuing to ignore everything I'm being told, I should be able to blindly walk into that dark corner and discover a hidden truth".

Plus, he simply doesn't understand simple ideas like friction, he doesn't do math, and he doesn't seem to have much practical experience.

 

You said you are expanding CO2 and producing cold. That much is refrigeration. You further said you would use the cold that results to sink the ambient heat and produce power to turn a turbine. That's using a refrigerator to power a Stirling engine, which is highly inefficient and costly to operate. It will not only not power itself, you will have to plug the device in and suck huge amounts of power just to get it to turn. For each kilowatt of power you burn, you will be lucky to produce 100 watts. It's not a generator of electricity at all. It's an energy waster.

 

One is every University you walk into. That suffices the Hydro power equation. 9 bar pressure one litre per second = 720 watts.

Other is claim of heating element maker!

Other entities so each, - 60 litre of water per minute x *C x 0.076 (= 228KW)

Pressure differential of CO2 solid to heat 80*C is 10,000 bar.

Pressure differential +50* C to +100*C, safe figures, 7,000 bar. (560KW)