Paul wrote:
--- "Stephen A. Lawrence" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
Nothing in, something out => efficiency = infinity.
The concept of infinite efficiency is somewhat
interesting. Consider a black box that requires 100
watts input, and outputs 1 KW. When operating the
black box could theoretically do away with the 100 W
input by robbing 100 watts from its 1 KW output. So
now the black box requires no input, but outputs 900
watts. :-)
Absolutely -- and that's the point. They say they've broken the first
law but they're still fiddling around trying to convince a panel of
experts that their device really is over unity.
If it's over unity, close the loop, and then there's no issue.
COP>1, which is their explicit claim, doesn't necessarily imply
over-unity, unfortunately, and almost surely implies they haven't closed
the loop, as I've already said.
On the other hand, the fact that they apparently can't close the loop
(at least, as I read their claims!) doesn't necessarily mean they
haven't got an OU device. Something which consumed 495 watts and
produced 500 watts might be hard to close the loop on, but it would
nonetheless be a spectacular breakthrough.
An example might be an electric motor which produced more mechanical
energy than the electrical energy it consumed -- to close the loop you
need to convert the mechanical energy back into electrical energy, which
introduces losses which may eat up your OU. The result would be
something that was in reality an amazing breakthrough, but which still
wouldn't convince Bob Parks. (Does this describe the Sprain motor? I
haven't been following that one.)
