Wes Moore wrote: >Hi Keith: I am afraid egos have entered this discussion.
Egos, hm. >The reality I see from all of the objections is some folks would like to be >physicists. I think being a good physicist requires extreme depth. LOL! Clearly I'm right out of my depth here Wes. I'll just leave you to it, eh? Meanwhile I'll go and gaze raptly at all those dollar bills flying in and out of our woodstove and gas cooker and so on. Think I'll post that message again, see below... >The >objections I have seen are valid to understand where the extra energy is >coming from. Once this is understood, it is helpful to look at what energy >is required as input and what we receive at the other end. >I am grateful for this discussion, it has been useful to me to organize >these procedures in my mind, and to be able to re-iterate them in an >intelligible way. >Beyond that I am only seeing a distortion of egos. > >Farmers seem to have a handle on this, they know the sun is providing a >certain amount of energy to help them grow corn. But they are smart enough >to focus on what energy input is necessary from them. Perhaps this is why so >many farmers just shake their head in disbelief when a physicist speaks Are you a farmer? I am. Best Keith Previous: >http://snipurl.com/17co2 >[Biofuel] Pendulum >Wed Jan 10 2007 >Wes Moore wrote: > > >-----Original Message----- > >Doug > >Being a pump does not preclude a device from being over unity. It does not > >violate physics because it extracts energy from one place and utilizes it at > >the other end of the cycle. From our perspective, we do not have to pay for > >all of the energy that we extract so it is over unity to us. > >Wes, what is your definition of "over-unity"? > >It seems you differentiate between two types of energy: energy you >pay for and energy you don't pay for. Physics isn't interested in how >you pay your bills. Running on home-brewed biodiesel our Toyota >TownAce probably qualifies as an over-unity device according to your >definition. Substituting "free energy" (below) also doesn't work >because it uses the same definition, "free" as in it doesn't cost you >money. > >It's about energy costs, not money costs, you can't substitute the >one for the other. You're confusing chalk and cheese (in a subject >that is quite confused enough already), and seeing over-unity/free >energy devices where there aren't any. (And there aren't any.) > >I asked you this: > > >Do you know of any other working, real-world, attested, > >authenticated examples of this over-unity device working? Or of any > >over-unity device working? > >The answer, with all the provisos and but-if's pruned away, was no, >and it's still no. >Wes > >On Behalf Of Keith Addison >Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 4:39 AM > >Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Pendulum > >Wes Moore wrote: > > >Oh yes I read what you wrote. You seem to think I should be > >concerned about the latent energy from the atmosphere and count it > >as the input cost. The input cost is what we need to do to make it > >work. Here in the real world where I live I can buy 8221 Btu > >(2.383Kw) of electrical energy for about 35.5 cents Canadian and > >turn it into $1.36 worth of energy. When I use just a little of the > >energy from the sun I increase the return on the input cost to > >$1.77. Who do you think I should pay to balance the account. > > > >I have no argument with you saying the latent energy in the > >atmosphere is the difference so you can balance your equation. > >Calculating the energy extracted from the atmosphere simply allows > >one to calculate what the over unity factor is. Seems pretty simple > >to me. > > > >I am glad the engineers who first built this system seemed to see > >things the way I do. I am sorry you don't agree. > > > >Wes > >And did you actually read what I wrote? > >http://snipurl.com/17co2 >[Biofuel] Pendulum >Wed Jan 10 2007 > >Keith > > >On Behalf Of Zeke > >Yewdall > >Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 10:51 PM > > > >Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Pendulum > > > > > > > >Huh? Did you actually read what I wrote? > > > >On 1/11/07, Wes Moore <<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >Yes and this is why what does not work in theory sometimes works in >practice > > > >Wes > > > > > > > >On Behalf Of Zeke Yewdall > >Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 9:25 PM > > > > > > > > > > > >On 1/11/07, Wes Moore <<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > >Taking the data for a unit similar to mine for an example: > > > >30,000btu McQuay with a typical condition 50F entering water temp @ > >6.1 GPM with return air temp @ 70, requires 2.383 KW to operate the > >pump. This is 8,221 BTU's input. . The output under these > >conditions is 31,413 BTU's indicating a COP of 3.86. > > > >My system draws from a 2,000 gallon pool connected to a thermal > >solar system © when the pool is 70 to 80 degrees my COP is around 5. > > > > > > > >I work in this industry and most of my colleagues refer to this as over >unity. > > > >The actual input to this system is somewhere above 31,413 BTUs -- > >not the 8,221BTUs you indicate -- some input being electrical > >energy, and some being thermal energy in that 50F entering water. > >When defining a thermodynamic system, it does not matter what form > >energy crosses the boundry of the system -- thermal, mecahnical, > >electrical, it all counts. Perhaps in the heat pump industry they > >refer to this as over-unity, but to a physicist, just hearing that > >immediately makes us discount it as nonsense. I can't speak for > >everyone else, but I don't think the arguement here is about whether > >heat pumps work, or how they work, but whether the definition > >over-unity can be applied to them. _______________________________________________ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
