Re: [Vo]: Quantum Thermodynamics
In any case you're not the first one to challenge the 2nd law, some famous names have tried before you it seems: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics If I was you I would study their work in depth, if only to make sure I don't duplicate it. E.g. have you looked into Feynman's brownian ratchet thought experiment BTW, and if so have you understood why it couldn't work according to him? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brownian_ratchet Michel - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 2:05 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]: Quantum Thermodynamics > Michel Jullian wrote: > --- > > Ok I remember you mentioned something of the sort now. So the hard bit is > > to > make the material convert its thermal energy contents to electrical energy > obviously, the rest follows. > > > > Known thermoelectric devices e.g. thermocouples need temperature > differentials, what makes you think you don't need one? Something feels wrong > about that material of yours acting as a heat source getting cooler while > providing electricity without some of the heat going to a cooler place, what > makes the heat move in the first place? > --- > > > > Does something sound wrong about extracting energy from a room full of > basketballs bouncing all over the place? Does something sound wrong about > extracting energy from air gas molecules bouncing in a container? Does > something sound wrong about extracting energy from ferromagnetic atoms that > are > vibrating at roughly 20 trillion times per second? > > There's a well-known and well quoted physicists P.W. Bridgman, (1941), "There > are almost as many formulations of the second law as there have been > discussions > of it." Even the physicists at Wikipedia display that quote in the 2nd Law > of > Thermodynamics wiki page. > > The 2nd law of thermodynamics varies from physicist to physicist. Those who > adhere to a stricter version believe there's no available entropy in a closed > container of air at room temperature at a constant temperature. > > An electrical resistor generates electrical noise. There is no upper voltage > crest to such noise. The longer you wait the higher the probability the > observer will detect a higher voltage crest of such noise. Furthermore, > there > is no *true* voltage level at which an LED suddenly *completely* stops > emitting > photons. Place a microvolt on an LED and wait long enough and it will emit a > photon. Average those photons over time caused by that small voltage and it > will be above blackbody radiation level. Connect a noisy resistor across a > red > LED and it will emit red photons. That may not sound like a lot of energy, > and > it's not given one such unit (R & LED). Create a few hundred trillion of such > units and you have a good constant visible "free energy" light source. Such a > unit could be several hundred nanometers is diameter, depending on the LED's > wavelength. > > > > > > Any experimental support for your theory? > > > Yes, I have my proof. Initially I had three unique experiments that > demonstrated > energy extraction from ambient temperature. 1. MCE. 2. R & LED. 3. T-ray > lens. > The first, MCE, was ridiculously difficult to replicate for various reasons > ranging from the nanocrystalline and amorphous cores sensitivity to external > electromagnetic fields and the sensitive temperature sensing nature of the > experiment. Theretofore I no longer demonstrate experiment #1 since > experiment > #2 & #3 is sufficient. I will demonstrate such proof to any scientist who > signs > papers thereby promising they will dedicate a minimum amount of time per > month > on such research. > > Getting people to work on such research in private is one thing given live > demonstrations to appeal their skepticism. Getting people to publicly work on > such research is another story. The balls already rolling. Truthfully I set > up > a system so not even I could halt this research at this point, which was the > goal. > > > Regards, > Paul Lowrance > > > > > > > > > > Michel > > > > - Original Message - > > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: > > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 12:23 AM > > Subject: Re: [Vo]: Quantum Thermodynamics > > > > > >> Actually I wouldn't use the term "atmosphere" to describe the energy > >> source. > >> The output of such a device would be electricity. Lets say an appliance is > >> connected to the device and energy is given the appliance. The device, > >> more > >> specifically the magnetic material, would cool down. The device would cool > >> down > >> and reach thermal equilibrium due to thermal conduction. So we have a > >> device > >> that's colder than room temperature and an appliance that is receiving > >> energy. > >> Most appliances simply return the energy in the form of heat. In a > >> nutshell, > >> energy is flowing from the device to th
RE: [Vo]: Re: No Thermite ?
A rock dropped from the top of either tower would have taken approximately 9 seconds to hit the ground free fall. Both towers fell in the same time frame 9 and 10 seconds approximately... free fall. ANY resistance from 'pan caking' or structural failure would have shown up in a significant increase in collapse time... several orders of magnitude more. And that is not even touching the fact that the resulting SYMMETRICAL damage profile is completely wrong for that hypothesis. Crash 10 fully fueled 767s into it if you want. You would never get even the worst tower ever built to collapse like that. The ONLY way for ANY structure like that to free fall collapse completely is staged demolition. All supports removed in an instant from top to bottom at regular intervals. Period. Those buildings were dropped (and nicely in one spot too). By who, why, or how is all a matter of conjecture after one recognizes that basic mathematical observation. NOT conspiracy theory. NOT arm chair science. No 'experts' needed. Simple math. Yes, please do "apply a modicum of quantitative thinking, basic physics and common sense to your assertions." -j -Original Message- From: Jed Rothwell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 9:50 AM To: vortex-L@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]: Re: No Thermite ? Let me say something here, people: This is a science forum. Please apply a modicum of quantitative thinking, basic physics and common sense to your assertions. You should realize that airplanes are much larger now than they were in 1945, and therefore the kinetic energy from an airplane crash is much greater. - Jed
Re: [Vo]: Re: lifter in a accelerating frame
Harry Veeder wrote: Michel Jullian wrote: Doing calculations in an accelerating frame makes me sick I am afraid ;-) But I guess it would be the same force, since it's not a ficticious one like e.g. the centrifugal force. Hum; ficticious force? Isn't the force that causes water going down drain to spin the centrifugal force?, what about tornados? The emdrive also comes to mind. If it works, is that a frame based phenomena? --- http://USFamily.Net/dialup.html - $8.25/mo! -- http://www.usfamily.net/dsl.html - $19.99/mo! ---
[Vo]: Re: E.V. Gray experiment
- Original Message From: Esa Ruoho What a coincidence. Double coincidence really - if we consider Finland and cold magnets and an earlier post ... I was tuning into an internet radio station here in California ( the Drone Zone, SOMA FM) where a piece was being played, composed by none other than Esa Ruoho. This was too coincidental - so I had to check with Wiki, the expert on everything, and indeed the composer is a person interested in alternative energy -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lackluster If you are that Esa, then you may be pleased to know that your minimalist music is well appreciated by at least one Vo. Otherwise it is most coincidental. Jones
Re: [Vo]: Re: E.V. Gray experiment
well wasnt one of the points that he could demonstrate lighting of bulbs, underwater. and that the lit bulbs wouldnt get cold at all. anything to do with "cold electricity" perchance? ;) On 27/02/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: What's interesting is the suggestion that the cores get cold. That's really the only effect I would be interested in regards to this experiment. Paul Lowrance Mike Carrell wrote: > A description such as this lacks much essential information necessary to > distinguish it from a 'mundane' electrical stunt. It's hardly wortth > speculating about. A lead-acid battery can supply very large surge > currents [as in starting a car] and with proper windings electromagnets > can strongly repel and if left connected would get quite hot. Capacitors > can be charged in parallel and discharged in series to provide > extraordinary surge power for rail guns and electromagnetic forming. AC > fields can configured to attract non-magnetic conductors and even > insulators. Looks magical until you think deeply. > > Mike Carrell > > - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 2:30 PM > Subject: [Vo]: E.V. Gray experiment > > >> There's a specific experiment that the late E.V. Gray performed that >> is fascinating --> >> >> >> Quote, >> --- >> In the workshop, a 6-volt car battery rested on a table. Lead wires >> ran from the battery to a series of capacitors which are the key to >> Gray's discovery. The complete system was wired to two electromagnets, >> each weighing a pound and a quarter. >> >> The first demonstration proved that Gray was using a totally different >> form of electrical current --- a powerful but "cold" form of the energy. >> >> As the test started, Gray said: "Now if you tried to charge those two >> magnets with juice from the battery and make them do what I'm going to >> make them do, you would drain the battery in 30 minutes and the >> magnets would get extremely hot." >> >> Fritz Lens activated the battery. A voltmeter indicated 3,000 volts. >> Gray threw a switch and there was a loud popping noise. The top magnet >> flew off with a powerful force. Richard Hackenberger caught it with >> his bare hands. >> >> What had happened was that gray had used a totally different form of >> electrical current --- a "cold" form of energy. The fact that >> Hackenberger caught the magnet and was not burned was evidence enough >> of that. >> --- >> >> >> Does anyone know how to replicate this specific E.V. Gray experiment? >> Personally I would disagree this is a new form of "cold" electricity. >> I firmly believe the energy comes from the magnetic materials ambient >> temperature. >> >> Are there any photos of this experiment? What type of magnetic >> material were the electromagnets made of? Was is merely capacitors >> discharging across the electromagnets or was there a circuit? How >> were the electromagnets situated? >> >> >> Regards, >> Paul Lowrance
Re: [Vo]: Re: E.V. Gray experiment
What's interesting is the suggestion that the cores get cold. That's really the only effect I would be interested in regards to this experiment. Paul Lowrance Mike Carrell wrote: > A description such as this lacks much essential information necessary to > distinguish it from a 'mundane' electrical stunt. It's hardly wortth > speculating about. A lead-acid battery can supply very large surge > currents [as in starting a car] and with proper windings electromagnets > can strongly repel and if left connected would get quite hot. Capacitors > can be charged in parallel and discharged in series to provide > extraordinary surge power for rail guns and electromagnetic forming. AC > fields can configured to attract non-magnetic conductors and even > insulators. Looks magical until you think deeply. > > Mike Carrell > > - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 2:30 PM > Subject: [Vo]: E.V. Gray experiment > > >> There's a specific experiment that the late E.V. Gray performed that >> is fascinating --> >> >> >> Quote, >> --- >> In the workshop, a 6-volt car battery rested on a table. Lead wires >> ran from the battery to a series of capacitors which are the key to >> Gray's discovery. The complete system was wired to two electromagnets, >> each weighing a pound and a quarter. >> >> The first demonstration proved that Gray was using a totally different >> form of electrical current --- a powerful but "cold" form of the energy. >> >> As the test started, Gray said: "Now if you tried to charge those two >> magnets with juice from the battery and make them do what I'm going to >> make them do, you would drain the battery in 30 minutes and the >> magnets would get extremely hot." >> >> Fritz Lens activated the battery. A voltmeter indicated 3,000 volts. >> Gray threw a switch and there was a loud popping noise. The top magnet >> flew off with a powerful force. Richard Hackenberger caught it with >> his bare hands. >> >> What had happened was that gray had used a totally different form of >> electrical current --- a "cold" form of energy. The fact that >> Hackenberger caught the magnet and was not burned was evidence enough >> of that. >> --- >> >> >> Does anyone know how to replicate this specific E.V. Gray experiment? >> Personally I would disagree this is a new form of "cold" electricity. >> I firmly believe the energy comes from the magnetic materials ambient >> temperature. >> >> Are there any photos of this experiment? What type of magnetic >> material were the electromagnets made of? Was is merely capacitors >> discharging across the electromagnets or was there a circuit? How >> were the electromagnets situated? >> >> >> Regards, >> Paul Lowrance
[Vo]: Re: E.V. Gray experiment
A description such as this lacks much essential information necessary to distinguish it from a 'mundane' electrical stunt. It's hardly wortth speculating about. A lead-acid battery can supply very large surge currents [as in starting a car] and with proper windings electromagnets can strongly repel and if left connected would get quite hot. Capacitors can be charged in parallel and discharged in series to provide extraordinary surge power for rail guns and electromagnetic forming. AC fields can configured to attract non-magnetic conductors and even insulators. Looks magical until you think deeply. Mike Carrell - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 2:30 PM Subject: [Vo]: E.V. Gray experiment There's a specific experiment that the late E.V. Gray performed that is fascinating --> Quote, --- In the workshop, a 6-volt car battery rested on a table. Lead wires ran from the battery to a series of capacitors which are the key to Gray's discovery. The complete system was wired to two electromagnets, each weighing a pound and a quarter. The first demonstration proved that Gray was using a totally different form of electrical current --- a powerful but "cold" form of the energy. As the test started, Gray said: "Now if you tried to charge those two magnets with juice from the battery and make them do what I'm going to make them do, you would drain the battery in 30 minutes and the magnets would get extremely hot." Fritz Lens activated the battery. A voltmeter indicated 3,000 volts. Gray threw a switch and there was a loud popping noise. The top magnet flew off with a powerful force. Richard Hackenberger caught it with his bare hands. What had happened was that gray had used a totally different form of electrical current --- a "cold" form of energy. The fact that Hackenberger caught the magnet and was not burned was evidence enough of that. --- Does anyone know how to replicate this specific E.V. Gray experiment? Personally I would disagree this is a new form of "cold" electricity. I firmly believe the energy comes from the magnetic materials ambient temperature. Are there any photos of this experiment? What type of magnetic material were the electromagnets made of? Was is merely capacitors discharging across the electromagnets or was there a circuit? How were the electromagnets situated? Regards, Paul Lowrance This Email has been scanned for all viruses by Medford Leas I.T. Department.
Re: [Vo]: Quantum Thermodynamics
Michel Jullian wrote: --- > Ok I remember you mentioned something of the sort now. So the hard bit is to make the material convert its thermal energy contents to electrical energy obviously, the rest follows. > > Known thermoelectric devices e.g. thermocouples need temperature differentials, what makes you think you don't need one? Something feels wrong about that material of yours acting as a heat source getting cooler while providing electricity without some of the heat going to a cooler place, what makes the heat move in the first place? --- Does something sound wrong about extracting energy from a room full of basketballs bouncing all over the place? Does something sound wrong about extracting energy from air gas molecules bouncing in a container? Does something sound wrong about extracting energy from ferromagnetic atoms that are vibrating at roughly 20 trillion times per second? There's a well-known and well quoted physicists P.W. Bridgman, (1941), "There are almost as many formulations of the second law as there have been discussions of it." Even the physicists at Wikipedia display that quote in the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics wiki page. The 2nd law of thermodynamics varies from physicist to physicist. Those who adhere to a stricter version believe there's no available entropy in a closed container of air at room temperature at a constant temperature. An electrical resistor generates electrical noise. There is no upper voltage crest to such noise. The longer you wait the higher the probability the observer will detect a higher voltage crest of such noise. Furthermore, there is no *true* voltage level at which an LED suddenly *completely* stops emitting photons. Place a microvolt on an LED and wait long enough and it will emit a photon. Average those photons over time caused by that small voltage and it will be above blackbody radiation level. Connect a noisy resistor across a red LED and it will emit red photons. That may not sound like a lot of energy, and it's not given one such unit (R & LED). Create a few hundred trillion of such units and you have a good constant visible "free energy" light source. Such a unit could be several hundred nanometers is diameter, depending on the LED's wavelength. > Any experimental support for your theory? Yes, I have my proof. Initially I had three unique experiments that demonstrated energy extraction from ambient temperature. 1. MCE. 2. R & LED. 3. T-ray lens. The first, MCE, was ridiculously difficult to replicate for various reasons ranging from the nanocrystalline and amorphous cores sensitivity to external electromagnetic fields and the sensitive temperature sensing nature of the experiment. Theretofore I no longer demonstrate experiment #1 since experiment #2 & #3 is sufficient. I will demonstrate such proof to any scientist who signs papers thereby promising they will dedicate a minimum amount of time per month on such research. Getting people to work on such research in private is one thing given live demonstrations to appeal their skepticism. Getting people to publicly work on such research is another story. The balls already rolling. Truthfully I set up a system so not even I could halt this research at this point, which was the goal. Regards, Paul Lowrance > > Michel > > - Original Message - > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 12:23 AM > Subject: Re: [Vo]: Quantum Thermodynamics > > >> Actually I wouldn't use the term "atmosphere" to describe the energy source. >> The output of such a device would be electricity. Lets say an appliance is >> connected to the device and energy is given the appliance. The device, more >> specifically the magnetic material, would cool down. The device would cool down >> and reach thermal equilibrium due to thermal conduction. So we have a device >> that's colder than room temperature and an appliance that is receiving energy. >> Most appliances simply return the energy in the form of heat. In a nutshell, >> energy is flowing from the device to the appliance to the air and back to the >> device. >> >> I've posted and attempted to explain how the MEG works. Such attempts at >> explaining the process have been a waste of time. Even a simple outlined >> explanation of the MCE process seems to be a waste of time. It just seems most >> physicists are uninterested. Perhaps they disbelieve ... who knows why. I feel >> like a legitimate unheard person shouting "Wolf." >> >> Regards, >> Paul Lowrance >> >> >> >> Michel Jullian wrote: >>> For calculus I can't help for lack of time I am afraid. Maybe you could >> consider using software for that, Mathematica does wonders at solving tricky >> integrals and such. >>> Besides I must admit I don't understand much of what you're writing, knowing >> very little about magnetism. I understand your aim is to use magnetic material >> as a kind of heat pump to draw
Re: [Vo]: Quantum Thermodynamics
Ok I remember you mentioned something of the sort now. So the hard bit is to make the material convert its thermal energy contents to electrical energy obviously, the rest follows. Known thermoelectric devices e.g. thermocouples need temperature differentials, what makes you think you don't need one? Something feels wrong about that material of yours acting as a heat source getting cooler while providing electricity without some of the heat going to a cooler place, what makes the heat move in the first place? Any experimental support for your theory? Michel - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2007 12:23 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]: Quantum Thermodynamics > Actually I wouldn't use the term "atmosphere" to describe the energy source. > The output of such a device would be electricity. Lets say an appliance is > connected to the device and energy is given the appliance. The device, more > specifically the magnetic material, would cool down. The device would cool > down > and reach thermal equilibrium due to thermal conduction. So we have a device > that's colder than room temperature and an appliance that is receiving > energy. > Most appliances simply return the energy in the form of heat. In a nutshell, > energy is flowing from the device to the appliance to the air and back to the > device. > > I've posted and attempted to explain how the MEG works. Such attempts at > explaining the process have been a waste of time. Even a simple outlined > explanation of the MCE process seems to be a waste of time. It just seems > most > physicists are uninterested. Perhaps they disbelieve ... who knows why. I > feel > like a legitimate unheard person shouting "Wolf." > > Regards, > Paul Lowrance > > > > Michel Jullian wrote: > > For calculus I can't help for lack of time I am afraid. Maybe you could > consider using software for that, Mathematica does wonders at solving tricky > integrals and such. > > > > Besides I must admit I don't understand much of what you're writing, > > knowing > very little about magnetism. I understand your aim is to use magnetic > material > as a kind of heat pump to draw heat from the atmosphere, but that's about > all. > Maybe you should make your explanations shorter and more practical. Suppose > your > theory works as you expect, can you briefly describe the energy extraction > device workings, order of magnitude of the size, the form of energy it would > output? (heat, electricity?) > > > > Michel > > > > - Original Message - > > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: > > Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 7:09 PM > > Subject: Re: [Vo]: Quantum Thermodynamics > > > > > >> Please read the plea for help in this research at the bottom of this post. > >> > >> > >> Michel Jullian wrote: > >>> Paul the "how" question may be premature, the last I remember you had > >> convincingly shown that total magnetic field energy increased when two > >> magnets > >> got attracted to each other, in addition to their kinetic energy > >> increasing, > but > >> couldn't the sum of these two energy increases be exactly equal to the > >> energy > >> you must expend to separate them in the first place? > >> > >> > >> Michel, you are correct, as far as I know it requires the same energy to > >> separate the magnets. Actually it should require more energy to separate > >> since > >> there's always some energy loss such as radiation. > >> > >> Personally the idea of "getting something from nothing" has always been > >> unattractive. Therefore my research has always been about capturing > >> ambient > >> temperature energy. IOW, atoms, electrons, molecules are moving and > vibrating at > >> room temperature-- electron velocity ~1/200 c. The average temperature of > >> our > >> planet is obviously sustained by the Sun. Therefore it's been my goal to > capture > >> that ambient temperature energy. > >> > >> I've simulated this far too many times in my head, which is one reason I'm > >> coding the simulation software. The idea is that a magnetic avalanche > >> consists > >> of magnetic atoms rotating and precessing in a avalanche. Such a rotating > >> magnetic field of each rotating atom generates radiation. Nearly all of > >> such > >> radiation is absorbed by the magnetic material. Such radiation causes the > >> magnetic material to heat up, which is first half of the MCE > >> (Magnetocaloric > >> effect) process. When the applied field is removed the aligned magnetic > >> moments > >> want to say in alignment, and therefore it requires energy to break the > magnetic > >> moment alignments. It is known that magnetic materials near absolute zero > >> Kelvin stay aligned without any applied field. The reason the magnetic > >> moments > >> in magnetic materials at room temperature break alignment is due to ambient > >> temperature. This removes energy from the magnetic materials ambient > >> temperatur
[Vo]: Re: : Quantum Thermodynamics
Paul, If you haven't seen this - someone may have mentioned it before - and have the inclination to wade through a hundred pages, which will tell you a lot about the Finn mentality and how they cope with interminable winters... and perhaps even a few pages related to what you have been looking into (p 22-26) have a shot at: http://www.helsinki.fi/~matpitka/faraday.pdf >From the scarce amount of data available it would seem that there could be a >connection between this putative phenomenon of ambient heat withdrawal, >magnetic extropy/entopy and microwave frequencies. This is suggestive of a >CMB-tapping mechanism. Jones "During the self-sustained mode a cooling of the environment in the vicinity of the magnetic system is observed. A stable fall of the common temperature 22 C of laboratory by 6-8 degrees was observed. This suggests violation of the second law. The sucking of energy from environment by a phase conjugate mechanism could be involved. That phase conjugate waves are involved was proposed also in the article of Dr. Paul la Violette [17]. Phase conjugate microwaves generated by magnetostatic waves are the best candidate for the generalized standing waves (actually rotating around stator magnet). The reason is that for sufficiently long wavelengths the dispersion relation does not depend on wavelength so that arbitrary wave pattern repeats itself periodically with a frequency which is expressible in terms of Larmor frequencies of electron in the fields defined by the magnetization and by the external field (now the field of roller inside stator)."
Re: [Vo]: Quantum Thermodynamics
Actually I wouldn't use the term "atmosphere" to describe the energy source. The output of such a device would be electricity. Lets say an appliance is connected to the device and energy is given the appliance. The device, more specifically the magnetic material, would cool down. The device would cool down and reach thermal equilibrium due to thermal conduction. So we have a device that's colder than room temperature and an appliance that is receiving energy. Most appliances simply return the energy in the form of heat. In a nutshell, energy is flowing from the device to the appliance to the air and back to the device. I've posted and attempted to explain how the MEG works. Such attempts at explaining the process have been a waste of time. Even a simple outlined explanation of the MCE process seems to be a waste of time. It just seems most physicists are uninterested. Perhaps they disbelieve ... who knows why. I feel like a legitimate unheard person shouting "Wolf." Regards, Paul Lowrance Michel Jullian wrote: > For calculus I can't help for lack of time I am afraid. Maybe you could consider using software for that, Mathematica does wonders at solving tricky integrals and such. > > Besides I must admit I don't understand much of what you're writing, knowing very little about magnetism. I understand your aim is to use magnetic material as a kind of heat pump to draw heat from the atmosphere, but that's about all. Maybe you should make your explanations shorter and more practical. Suppose your theory works as you expect, can you briefly describe the energy extraction device workings, order of magnitude of the size, the form of energy it would output? (heat, electricity?) > > Michel > > - Original Message - > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 7:09 PM > Subject: Re: [Vo]: Quantum Thermodynamics > > >> Please read the plea for help in this research at the bottom of this post. >> >> >> Michel Jullian wrote: >>> Paul the "how" question may be premature, the last I remember you had >> convincingly shown that total magnetic field energy increased when two magnets >> got attracted to each other, in addition to their kinetic energy increasing, but >> couldn't the sum of these two energy increases be exactly equal to the energy >> you must expend to separate them in the first place? >> >> >> Michel, you are correct, as far as I know it requires the same energy to >> separate the magnets. Actually it should require more energy to separate since >> there's always some energy loss such as radiation. >> >> Personally the idea of "getting something from nothing" has always been >> unattractive. Therefore my research has always been about capturing ambient >> temperature energy. IOW, atoms, electrons, molecules are moving and vibrating at >> room temperature-- electron velocity ~1/200 c. The average temperature of our >> planet is obviously sustained by the Sun. Therefore it's been my goal to capture >> that ambient temperature energy. >> >> I've simulated this far too many times in my head, which is one reason I'm >> coding the simulation software. The idea is that a magnetic avalanche consists >> of magnetic atoms rotating and precessing in a avalanche. Such a rotating >> magnetic field of each rotating atom generates radiation. Nearly all of such >> radiation is absorbed by the magnetic material. Such radiation causes the >> magnetic material to heat up, which is first half of the MCE (Magnetocaloric >> effect) process. When the applied field is removed the aligned magnetic moments >> want to say in alignment, and therefore it requires energy to break the magnetic >> moment alignments. It is known that magnetic materials near absolute zero >> Kelvin stay aligned without any applied field. The reason the magnetic moments >> in magnetic materials at room temperature break alignment is due to ambient >> temperature. This removes energy from the magnetic materials ambient >> temperature, which is why magnetic materials cool down when the applied field is >> removed. >> >> The idea is to capture enough of such radiation to overcome all losses while >> providing enough energy to self-sustain the machine while providing useful >> energy output. >> >> The above is a vague description of my research and cannot possibly convey what >> I've learned, as the technique of extracting this energy is very complex. A >> researcher in this field will initially see interesting concepts such as >> vibrating atoms have no rotation preference. Example, lets say the coil >> influences more magnetic moments to rotate in a clockwise rotational direction >> in the avalanches. Although there is a great deal of rotational friction in >> common magnetic materials, you will note that vibrating atoms do no have a >> rotational preference. IOW, consider a single atom that we'll call X. A >> neighboring atom could influence a counter-clockwise rotationa
Re: [Vo]: Quantum Thermodynamics
For calculus I can't help for lack of time I am afraid. Maybe you could consider using software for that, Mathematica does wonders at solving tricky integrals and such. Besides I must admit I don't understand much of what you're writing, knowing very little about magnetism. I understand your aim is to use magnetic material as a kind of heat pump to draw heat from the atmosphere, but that's about all. Maybe you should make your explanations shorter and more practical. Suppose your theory works as you expect, can you briefly describe the energy extraction device workings, order of magnitude of the size, the form of energy it would output? (heat, electricity?) Michel - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 7:09 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]: Quantum Thermodynamics > Please read the plea for help in this research at the bottom of this post. > > > Michel Jullian wrote: > > Paul the "how" question may be premature, the last I remember you had > convincingly shown that total magnetic field energy increased when two > magnets > got attracted to each other, in addition to their kinetic energy increasing, > but > couldn't the sum of these two energy increases be exactly equal to the energy > you must expend to separate them in the first place? > > > Michel, you are correct, as far as I know it requires the same energy to > separate the magnets. Actually it should require more energy to separate > since > there's always some energy loss such as radiation. > > Personally the idea of "getting something from nothing" has always been > unattractive. Therefore my research has always been about capturing ambient > temperature energy. IOW, atoms, electrons, molecules are moving and vibrating > at > room temperature-- electron velocity ~1/200 c. The average temperature of > our > planet is obviously sustained by the Sun. Therefore it's been my goal to > capture > that ambient temperature energy. > > I've simulated this far too many times in my head, which is one reason I'm > coding the simulation software. The idea is that a magnetic avalanche > consists > of magnetic atoms rotating and precessing in a avalanche. Such a rotating > magnetic field of each rotating atom generates radiation. Nearly all of such > radiation is absorbed by the magnetic material. Such radiation causes the > magnetic material to heat up, which is first half of the MCE (Magnetocaloric > effect) process. When the applied field is removed the aligned magnetic > moments > want to say in alignment, and therefore it requires energy to break the > magnetic > moment alignments. It is known that magnetic materials near absolute zero > Kelvin stay aligned without any applied field. The reason the magnetic > moments > in magnetic materials at room temperature break alignment is due to ambient > temperature. This removes energy from the magnetic materials ambient > temperature, which is why magnetic materials cool down when the applied field > is > removed. > > The idea is to capture enough of such radiation to overcome all losses while > providing enough energy to self-sustain the machine while providing useful > energy output. > > The above is a vague description of my research and cannot possibly convey > what > I've learned, as the technique of extracting this energy is very complex. A > researcher in this field will initially see interesting concepts such as > vibrating atoms have no rotation preference. Example, lets say the coil > influences more magnetic moments to rotate in a clockwise rotational > direction > in the avalanches. Although there is a great deal of rotational friction in > common magnetic materials, you will note that vibrating atoms do no have a > rotational preference. IOW, consider a single atom that we'll call X. A > neighboring atom could influence a counter-clockwise rotational force on atom > X. > Next, another neighboring atom could influence a clockwise rotational force > on > atom X. The average rotational force on atom X is zero. > > Such a researcher will also understand *saturated* magnetic material absorbs > appreciably less radiation. Another key note to such research is > understanding > the magnetic entropy in magnetic material during various situations. For > example, a fully saturated magnetic toroid at absolute zero Kelvin has zero > internal magnetic entropy. Magnetic material at Curie temperature has close > to > maximum internal magnetic entropy. The amount of magnetic entropy at say > 300K > greatly varies from material to material. I theorize nanocrystalline and > amorphous magnetic materials possess relatively high magnetic entropy at room > temperatures. The idea is to influence maximum magnetic entropy followed by > an > energy extraction technique. On many occasions I have attempted to mentally > simulate the MEG. Such mental simulations indicate the precise permanen
Re: [Vo]: Re: Quantum Thermodynamics
Jones Beene <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > It would be more interesting if JNL could somehow measure temperature > changes directly on the spinning magnetic material. He could use a > thermal gun. That probably will not happen, but then we have Steorn This company is an enigma to me, as their approach is so... how shall I say it? 'brain-dead' is a bit crude (Steve Jobs' favorite repartee) but not inaccurate from everything which has appeared in print. ... but anyway... although I am more skeptical of Steorn than of the Newman machine, both may well demonstrate glimpses of OU at times, with repeatability being the salient issue. Nevertheless, it would be ridiculously easy for Steorn (assuming that they even have a well-equipped laboratory, which is not a given) to take and datalog these measurements, and then to report the results without giving up a scintilla of proprietary information. The forum intro states that their device does not interact with the environment for its power. And the CEO has explicitly said that there is not a temperature change in the environment of the device, aside from heat generated by friction. They've done the experiment. You may be disappointed that they don't give out the numbers, but considering how much money they could lose if the cat is let out of the bag before they are ready, I can't say I blame them. Then the question would remain (assuming a temperature drop)... can you trust anyone who chooses this kind of strategy to introduce an earth-shaking transformative technology - which supposedly is already patented, and which is instantly marketable by any number of large and cash-loaded corporate partners, if it did not come with heavy 'baggage'? ...unless, of course Steorn suspects that they a sooo-close to success, yet that the technology is not quite(?)= repeatable? reliable? robust? or whatever... and are praying to St. Patrick for some kind of Irish-luck miracle of insight, to be derived from the assorted experts who have been enticed by the hype, and who are, in effect, giving them free consulting services which they could never otherwise afford. That gambit is the only scenario which makes any sense to me. Jones - The fish are biting. Get more visitors on your site using Yahoo! Search Marketing.
[Vo]: Re: Quantum Thermodynamics
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It would be more interesting if JNL could somehow measure temperature changes directly on the spinning magnetic material. He could use a thermal gun. That probably will not happen, but then we have Steorn This company is an enigma to me, as their approach is so... how shall I say it? 'brain-dead' is a bit crude (Steve Jobs' favorite repartee) but not inaccurate from everything which has appeared in print. ... but anyway... although I am more skeptical of Steorn than of the Newman machine, both may well demonstrate glimpses of OU at times, with repeatability being the salient issue. Nevertheless, it would be ridiculously easy for Steorn (assuming that they even have a well-equipped laboratory, which is not a given) to take and datalog these measurements, and then to report the results without giving up a scintilla of proprietary information. Then the question would remain (assuming a temperature drop)... can you trust anyone who chooses this kind of strategy to introduce an earth-shaking transformative technology - which supposedly is already patented, and which is instantly marketable by any number of large and cash-loaded corporate partners, if it did not come with heavy 'baggage'? ...unless, of course Steorn suspects that they a sooo-close to success, yet that the technology is not quite(?)= repeatable? reliable? robust? or whatever... and are praying to St. Patrick for some kind of Irish-luck miracle of insight, to be derived from the assorted experts who have been enticed by the hype, and who are, in effect, giving them free consulting services which they could never otherwise afford. That gambit is the only scenario which makes any sense to me. Jones
Re: [Vo]: Quantum Thermodynamics
Jones Beene wrote: > OK the cooling results shown are intriguing but not conclusive We should note that JNL merely measured the temperature drop in the wires. Note that the wires are stationary, but the magnetic material is spinning. JNL did not directly measure any temperature changes in the magnetic material. Completely stagnate air is a good thermal insulator, but the slightest air currents makes air a bad thermal insulator. A spinning disc as in the case of JNL's Newman replication obviously would cause air circulation. If the energy is coming from the magnetic material, as I suspect, then the magnetic material would cool down, which would quickly transfer to the surrounding air, in which a small percentage would transfer to the surrounding wires. The air would receive most of the cooling effect. It would be more interesting if JNL could somehow measure temperature changes directly on the spinning magnetic material. He could use a thermal gun. Regards, Paul Lowrance
[Vo]: E.V. Gray experiment
There's a specific experiment that the late E.V. Gray performed that is fascinating --> Quote, --- In the workshop, a 6-volt car battery rested on a table. Lead wires ran from the battery to a series of capacitors which are the key to Gray's discovery. The complete system was wired to two electromagnets, each weighing a pound and a quarter. The first demonstration proved that Gray was using a totally different form of electrical current --- a powerful but "cold" form of the energy. As the test started, Gray said: "Now if you tried to charge those two magnets with juice from the battery and make them do what I'm going to make them do, you would drain the battery in 30 minutes and the magnets would get extremely hot." Fritz Lens activated the battery. A voltmeter indicated 3,000 volts. Gray threw a switch and there was a loud popping noise. The top magnet flew off with a powerful force. Richard Hackenberger caught it with his bare hands. What had happened was that gray had used a totally different form of electrical current --- a "cold" form of energy. The fact that Hackenberger caught the magnet and was not burned was evidence enough of that. --- Does anyone know how to replicate this specific E.V. Gray experiment? Personally I would disagree this is a new form of "cold" electricity. I firmly believe the energy comes from the magnetic materials ambient temperature. Are there any photos of this experiment? What type of magnetic material were the electromagnets made of? Was is merely capacitors discharging across the electromagnets or was there a circuit? How were the electromagnets situated? Regards, Paul Lowrance
Re: [Vo]: New multiwire-plane lifter design guide (was Re: lifter in a accelerating frame)
power consumption 45kW I thought turning up the voltage to achieve the specified kV/mm was what you meant by 'max value' in the example section. Harry Michel Jullian wrote: > Better: area OK, but power still wrong. > > Michel > > - Original Message - > From: "Harry Veeder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 11:07 AM > Subject: Re: [Vo]: New multiwire-plane lifter design guide (was Re: lifter in > a accelerating frame) > > >> Michel Jullian wrote: >> >>> >>> Harry wrote: >>> > 100 kg thrust, 1 m gap, 0.9 kV/mm >>> ... Is this correct? power consumption 9 kW area 3.1 m^2 wire spacing 1.3m >>> >>> Only the wire spacing is correct, check your power and area calculations. >> >> >> power consumption 90 kW >> area 310 m^2 >> >> Harry >> Suggestions: Rephrase the scaling rules to read: "The W per g are proportional to the kV/mm, whereas the m^2 per g are proportional to the inverse square of the kV/mm." I would also explicitly show the mass in the calculation of the area in the example section. >>> >>> Thanks for the improvements, revised version: >>> * >>> MULTIWIRE-PLANE LIFTER/IONOCRAFT DESIGN GUIDE: >>> >>> Reference design: At 1 kV/mm (the max we can do without arcing) the power >>> consumption is 2 W per "gram" of thrust, and the required area is 0.0025 m^2 >>> per g. >>> >>> Scaling rules: The W per g are proportional to the kV/mm, whereas the m^2 >>> per >>> g are proportional to the inverse square of the kV/mm. >>> >>> Wire: as thin as possible (0.1mm OK in most cases), wire-wire spacing = 1.3 >>> times the gap length d (optimum value) >>> >>> EXAMPLE: >>> --- >>> We want to lift 50 g, and we choose a v/d of half the max value i.e. 0.5 >>> kV/mm, namely v=25kV for a d=50mm gap, to save on power consumption (our >>> color >>> monitor is only 75W) >>> >>> 1/ Required power per g: 2 W * 0.5 = 1 W -> Power consumption for 50 g = 50 >>> W >>> 2/ Required area per g: 0.0025 m^2 / 0.5^2 = 0.01 m^2 -> Area for 50 g = >>> 0.50 >>> m^2 >>> 3/ Wire-wire spacing: 1.3*50 mm = 65mm >>> >>> * >>> -- >>> Michel
Re: [Vo]: Quantum Thermodynamics
Please read the plea for help in this research at the bottom of this post. Michel Jullian wrote: > Paul the "how" question may be premature, the last I remember you had convincingly shown that total magnetic field energy increased when two magnets got attracted to each other, in addition to their kinetic energy increasing, but couldn't the sum of these two energy increases be exactly equal to the energy you must expend to separate them in the first place? Michel, you are correct, as far as I know it requires the same energy to separate the magnets. Actually it should require more energy to separate since there's always some energy loss such as radiation. Personally the idea of "getting something from nothing" has always been unattractive. Therefore my research has always been about capturing ambient temperature energy. IOW, atoms, electrons, molecules are moving and vibrating at room temperature-- electron velocity ~1/200 c. The average temperature of our planet is obviously sustained by the Sun. Therefore it's been my goal to capture that ambient temperature energy. I've simulated this far too many times in my head, which is one reason I'm coding the simulation software. The idea is that a magnetic avalanche consists of magnetic atoms rotating and precessing in a avalanche. Such a rotating magnetic field of each rotating atom generates radiation. Nearly all of such radiation is absorbed by the magnetic material. Such radiation causes the magnetic material to heat up, which is first half of the MCE (Magnetocaloric effect) process. When the applied field is removed the aligned magnetic moments want to say in alignment, and therefore it requires energy to break the magnetic moment alignments. It is known that magnetic materials near absolute zero Kelvin stay aligned without any applied field. The reason the magnetic moments in magnetic materials at room temperature break alignment is due to ambient temperature. This removes energy from the magnetic materials ambient temperature, which is why magnetic materials cool down when the applied field is removed. The idea is to capture enough of such radiation to overcome all losses while providing enough energy to self-sustain the machine while providing useful energy output. The above is a vague description of my research and cannot possibly convey what I've learned, as the technique of extracting this energy is very complex. A researcher in this field will initially see interesting concepts such as vibrating atoms have no rotation preference. Example, lets say the coil influences more magnetic moments to rotate in a clockwise rotational direction in the avalanches. Although there is a great deal of rotational friction in common magnetic materials, you will note that vibrating atoms do no have a rotational preference. IOW, consider a single atom that we'll call X. A neighboring atom could influence a counter-clockwise rotational force on atom X. Next, another neighboring atom could influence a clockwise rotational force on atom X. The average rotational force on atom X is zero. Such a researcher will also understand *saturated* magnetic material absorbs appreciably less radiation. Another key note to such research is understanding the magnetic entropy in magnetic material during various situations. For example, a fully saturated magnetic toroid at absolute zero Kelvin has zero internal magnetic entropy. Magnetic material at Curie temperature has close to maximum internal magnetic entropy. The amount of magnetic entropy at say 300K greatly varies from material to material. I theorize nanocrystalline and amorphous magnetic materials possess relatively high magnetic entropy at room temperatures. The idea is to influence maximum magnetic entropy followed by an energy extraction technique. On many occasions I have attempted to mentally simulate the MEG. Such mental simulations indicate the precise permanent magnet within the MEG will greatly increase the magnetic entropy within the magnetic material. Hopefully my simulation will confirm this and lead to an improved design that will work on common silicon iron. One concern is that such energy would mostly come from the inner core, which would cause rapid inner core temperature changes. Such temperature changes would require a circuit that adapts to such changes to maintain COP > 1.0. That's an outline. What boggles my mind is physicists publicly ignore this research. Why? It sure would be nice if other qualified physicists would publicly contribute to this research. IMHO the evidence is as clear as day this is a source of "free energy" obtainable with present technology. My only purpose posting now a days is to gain help in this research. No offense intended to cold fusion and ZPE research, but it boggles my mind why people would continue such unknown territory when there's a guaranteed alternative. All that's required is a s
Re: [Vo]: Quantum Thermodynamics
Paul the "how" question may be premature, the last I remember you had convincingly shown that total magnetic field energy increased when two magnets got attracted to each other, in addition to their kinetic energy increasing, but couldn't the sum of these two energy increases be exactly equal to the energy you must expend to separate them in the first place? Michel - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 3:30 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]: Quantum Thermodynamics > Terry Blanton wrote: > > Gnorts Vorts! > > > > While some things must remain on the QT, I was reading that TB > > (Bearden, not me) claims that his MEG gets cool when it's pumping > > power. Would any Vorts care to speculate how an OU device would take > > heat from the environment? > > > > Terry > > > > Hi, > > The "how" has been my entire research over the past several years. Presently > I'm writing a near atomic scale magnetic simulation program that will not > only > show people via animation how ambient temperature energy is moved from > magnetic > material to an appliance, but hopefully the simulation will reveal an > efficient > method using inexpensive common magnetic cores such as silicon iron. > > Can you please quote where Bearden claims the MEG gets cool or perhaps a link > to > the quote? > > Thanks, > Paul Lowrance >
Re: [Vo]: Quantum Thermodynamics
On 2/26/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Can you please quote where Bearden claims the MEG gets cool or perhaps a link to the quote? I think the exact statement was MEG created negative entropy in one of the O(3) electrodynamics papers. I'll look for the citation. Terry
Re: [Vo]: Quantum Thermodynamics
Terry Blanton wrote: > Gnorts Vorts! > > While some things must remain on the QT, I was reading that TB > (Bearden, not me) claims that his MEG gets cool when it's pumping > power. Would any Vorts care to speculate how an OU device would take > heat from the environment? > > Terry Hi, The "how" has been my entire research over the past several years. Presently I'm writing a near atomic scale magnetic simulation program that will not only show people via animation how ambient temperature energy is moved from magnetic material to an appliance, but hopefully the simulation will reveal an efficient method using inexpensive common magnetic cores such as silicon iron. Can you please quote where Bearden claims the MEG gets cool or perhaps a link to the quote? Thanks, Paul Lowrance
[Vo]: People lobbying for cold fusion in Washington
A fool's errand. See: http://pesn.com/2007/02/25/9500459_Kaplan_DC/ - Jed
Re: [Vo]: New multiwire-plane lifter design guide (was Re: lifter in a accelerating frame)
Revised version below, I added a Google calculator for each parameter, the reference to the original Blazelabs work, and an exercise (if Harry feels like having a try). Corrections/improvements welcome. Share and enjoy. Michel * MULTIWIRE-PLANE LIFTER/IONOCRAFT SIMPLER DESIGN GUIDE V1.1 by Michel Jullian [EMAIL PROTECTED] First published on Vortex list 25-26 February 2007. Based on 'Optimum multiwire-to-plane EHD thruster design guide v2.0' http://blazelabs.com/Multiwire-plane.pdf RULES: -- Reference design: At 1 kV/mm (the max we can do without arcing) the power consumption is 2 W per "gram" of thrust, and the required area is 0.0025 m^2 per g. Scaling rules: The W per g are proportional to the kV/mm, whereas the m^2 per g are proportional to the inverse square of the kV/mm. Wire: as thin as possible (0.1mm OK in most cases), wire-wire spacing = 1.3 times the gap length d (optimum value) EXAMPLE and calculators: We want to lift 50 g, and we choose a v/d of half the max value i.e. 0.5 kV/mm, namely v=25kV for a d=50mm gap, to save on power consumption (our color monitor is only 75W) The links are "Google calculators" (ignore initial Google results and replace the variable names by their values: double click name and type value) 1/ Required power per g: 2 W * 0.5 = 1 W -> Power consumption for 50 g = 50 W http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=2++*+kVPerMm+*+grams&btnG=Google+Search 2/ Required area per g: 0.0025 m^2 / 0.5^2 = 0.01 m^2 -> Area for 50 g = 0.50 m^2 http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=0.0025++%2F++kVpermm%5E2+*+Grams&btnG=Search 3/ Wire-wire spacing: 1.3*50 mm = 65mm http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=1.3*GapLengthMm&btnG=Search EXERCISE: -- Re-design Xavier's 100g payload lifter (total mass 187g, v/d=0.5 kV/mm, d=92mm). Find power, area and wire spacing, verify results at http://www.blazelabs.com/e-exp14.asp *
Re: [Vo]: New multiwire-plane lifter design guide (was Re: lifter in a accelerating frame)
Better: area OK, but power still wrong. Michel - Original Message - From: "Harry Veeder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 11:07 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]: New multiwire-plane lifter design guide (was Re: lifter in a accelerating frame) > Michel Jullian wrote: > >> >> Harry wrote: >> 100 kg thrust, 1 m gap, 0.9 kV/mm >> ... >>> Is this correct? >>> >>> power consumption 9 kW >>> area 3.1 m^2 >>> wire spacing 1.3m >> >> Only the wire spacing is correct, check your power and area calculations. > > > power consumption 90 kW > area 310 m^2 > > Harry > >>> Suggestions: >>> Rephrase the scaling rules to read: >>> >>> "The W per g are proportional to the kV/mm, whereas the m^2 per g are >>> proportional to the inverse square of the kV/mm." >>> >>> I would also explicitly show the mass in the calculation >>> of the area in the example section. >> >> Thanks for the improvements, revised version: >> * >> MULTIWIRE-PLANE LIFTER/IONOCRAFT DESIGN GUIDE: >> >> Reference design: At 1 kV/mm (the max we can do without arcing) the power >> consumption is 2 W per "gram" of thrust, and the required area is 0.0025 m^2 >> per g. >> >> Scaling rules: The W per g are proportional to the kV/mm, whereas the m^2 per >> g are proportional to the inverse square of the kV/mm. >> >> Wire: as thin as possible (0.1mm OK in most cases), wire-wire spacing = 1.3 >> times the gap length d (optimum value) >> >> EXAMPLE: >> --- >> We want to lift 50 g, and we choose a v/d of half the max value i.e. 0.5 >> kV/mm, namely v=25kV for a d=50mm gap, to save on power consumption (our >> color >> monitor is only 75W) >> >> 1/ Required power per g: 2 W * 0.5 = 1 W -> Power consumption for 50 g = 50 >> W >> 2/ Required area per g: 0.0025 m^2 / 0.5^2 = 0.01 m^2 -> Area for 50 g = 0.50 >> m^2 >> 3/ Wire-wire spacing: 1.3*50 mm = 65mm >> >> * >> -- >> Michel >> >> >> >> >
Re: [Vo]: New multiwire-plane lifter design guide (was Re: lifter in a accelerating frame)
Michel Jullian wrote: > > Harry wrote: > >>> 100 kg thrust, 1 m gap, 0.9 kV/mm > ... >> Is this correct? >> >> power consumption 9 kW >> area 3.1 m^2 >> wire spacing 1.3m > > Only the wire spacing is correct, check your power and area calculations. power consumption 90 kW area 310 m^2 Harry >> Suggestions: >> Rephrase the scaling rules to read: >> >> "The W per g are proportional to the kV/mm, whereas the m^2 per g are >> proportional to the inverse square of the kV/mm." >> >> I would also explicitly show the mass in the calculation >> of the area in the example section. > > Thanks for the improvements, revised version: > * > MULTIWIRE-PLANE LIFTER/IONOCRAFT DESIGN GUIDE: > > Reference design: At 1 kV/mm (the max we can do without arcing) the power > consumption is 2 W per "gram" of thrust, and the required area is 0.0025 m^2 > per g. > > Scaling rules: The W per g are proportional to the kV/mm, whereas the m^2 per > g are proportional to the inverse square of the kV/mm. > > Wire: as thin as possible (0.1mm OK in most cases), wire-wire spacing = 1.3 > times the gap length d (optimum value) > > EXAMPLE: > --- > We want to lift 50 g, and we choose a v/d of half the max value i.e. 0.5 > kV/mm, namely v=25kV for a d=50mm gap, to save on power consumption (our color > monitor is only 75W) > > 1/ Required power per g: 2 W * 0.5 = 1 W -> Power consumption for 50 g = 50 W > 2/ Required area per g: 0.0025 m^2 / 0.5^2 = 0.01 m^2 -> Area for 50 g = 0.50 > m^2 > 3/ Wire-wire spacing: 1.3*50 mm = 65mm > > * > -- > Michel > > > >
[Vo]: New multiwire-plane lifter design guide (was Re: lifter in a accelerating frame)
Harry wrote: >> 100 kg thrust, 1 m gap, 0.9 kV/mm ... > Is this correct? > > power consumption 9 kW > area 3.1 m^2 > wire spacing 1.3m Only the wire spacing is correct, check your power and area calculations. > Suggestions: > Rephrase the scaling rules to read: > > "The W per g are proportional to the kV/mm, whereas the m^2 per g are > proportional to the inverse square of the kV/mm." > > I would also explicitly show the mass in the calculation > of the area in the example section. Thanks for the improvements, revised version: * MULTIWIRE-PLANE LIFTER/IONOCRAFT DESIGN GUIDE: Reference design: At 1 kV/mm (the max we can do without arcing) the power consumption is 2 W per "gram" of thrust, and the required area is 0.0025 m^2 per g. Scaling rules: The W per g are proportional to the kV/mm, whereas the m^2 per g are proportional to the inverse square of the kV/mm. Wire: as thin as possible (0.1mm OK in most cases), wire-wire spacing = 1.3 times the gap length d (optimum value) EXAMPLE: --- We want to lift 50 g, and we choose a v/d of half the max value i.e. 0.5 kV/mm, namely v=25kV for a d=50mm gap, to save on power consumption (our color monitor is only 75W) 1/ Required power per g: 2 W * 0.5 = 1 W -> Power consumption for 50 g = 50 W 2/ Required area per g: 0.0025 m^2 / 0.5^2 = 0.01 m^2 -> Area for 50 g = 0.50 m^2 3/ Wire-wire spacing: 1.3*50 mm = 65mm * -- Michel
Re: [Vo]: Re: lifter in a accelerating frame
Michel Jullian wrote: > Doing calculations in an accelerating frame makes me sick I am afraid ;-) But > I guess it would be the same force, since it's not a ficticious one like e.g. > the centrifugal force. That will do. I didn't mean to make you sick. Harry
Re: [Vo]: Re: lifter in a accelerating frame
Not sure what you mean Robin, drawing welcome, I suspect it resembles a NASA design where the wire was replaced by a sharp edge. I don't see how the thrust could exceed the rate of change of momentum transmitted from the ions to the air i*d/mu though, as this experimentally verified formula already assumes zero air resistance of the lifter structure. Also beware that charges deposited on insulators interact with the discharge! (BTW it's Coanda, not Coander) Michel - Original Message - From: "Robin van Spaandonk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 3:29 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]: Re: lifter in a accelerating frame > In reply to Michel Jullian's message of Mon, 26 Feb 2007 00:27:04 +0100: > Hi Michel, > [snip] >>Doing calculations in an accelerating frame makes me sick I am afraid ;-) But >>I guess it would be the same force, since it's not a ficticious one like e.g. >>the centrifugal force. >> >>My turn to give you some homework Harry, could you try the new >>multiwire-plane design guide I posted earlier today and let me know how >>usable it is? Say design the mother of all lifters, with the following specs: >> >>100 kg thrust, 1 m gap, 0.9 kV/mm >> >>Power consumption, area, wire spacing? >> >>Michel > [snip] > Someone should try a flying saucer shaped lifter, with a circular wire ring on > top as positive electrode, and disk shaped cathode underneath. The advantage > of > this is that you get extra lift from the Coander effect. The body should be a > good insulator (styrafoam?). > > Regards, > > Robin van Spaandonk > > http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ > > Competition (capitalism) provides the motivation, > Cooperation (communism) provides the means. >
Re: [Vo]: Re: lifter in a accelerating frame
Michel Jullian wrote: > > My turn to give you some homework Harry, could you try the new multiwire-plane > design guide I posted earlier today and let me know how usable it is? Say > design the mother of all lifters, with the following specs: > > 100 kg thrust, 1 m gap, 0.9 kV/mm > > Power consumption, area, wire spacing? > > Michel Is this correct? power consumption 9 kW area 3.1 m^2 wire spacing 1.3m Suggestions: Rephrase the scaling rules to read: "The W per g are proportional to the kV/mm, whereas the m^2 per g are proportional to the inverse square of the kV/mm." I would also explicitly show the mass in the calculation of the area in the example section. Harry
