Well, since the French translation doesn't come... ;-) Heatless explosion, interesting, I had never heard of this although when you think about it there are well known chemical reactions where volume increases while heat is absorbed, namely evaporations, so if you combine any heat-releasing reaction, explosive or not, with an evaporation reaction absorbing exactly the same heat you get an explosion which doesn't release any heat.
Elementary thermochemistry, doesn't violate any LoT I am afraid. Michel (a good soul not censored by Jones's system please hit reply and send) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jones Beene" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "vortex" <vortex-l@eskimo.com>; "Michel Jullian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 9:33 PM Subject: Re: Loop closed > Michel, > > > BTW your challenge/riddle beats me, can the thing be made OU after all? > > If you mean in a circular way - "are there specific demonstrable > physical violations of the LoT, aside from LENR; and is any example > amenable to being harnessed in a device which incorporates a heat pump?" > If that is the question - and aside from LENR effects, and the hydrino, > and high-efficiency electrolysis, already mentioned - any or all of > which can be used in conjunction with a heat pump situation, there are > at least two more of these anomalous "cross-category" effects. One is > "IPE" and the other is the "entropic explosion", or the heatless bomb. > > By "cross-category" effect, I am referring to the lesser-known effects > which are not "merely" thermodynamic, and which may involve "new > physics" - either nuclear (as in induced photon emission = IPE) or > supra-chemical reactions. Supra-chemical reactions are reactions in > which atoms interact in ways which are not nuclear but involve "more > than" valence electrons - for instance: the k-shell electrons, the > Mossbauer effect and the Auger cascade - or in the case of the hydrino, > a prolonged condition below ground state in which angular momentum, or > some other form of energy may be withdrawn - which level of energy puts > the reaction above (supra) the well-know chemical reactions, which do > obey the LoT. > > Well, to cut to the chase, some time ago I mentioned the situation of > "entropic explosion". Since you probably missed a golden opportunity for > further enlightenment at that time, as it was one of those posts where > the subject line turned up missing, I will enclose an amended version below. > > I appreciate the fact that you do not enjoy long postings - and my > apologies in advance for that. I would try to shorten it more, or > translate it into French if I had the time, but for now, this will have > to do. > > Jones > > > Subject: Entropic Explosion (heatless bomb) > > First a definition: "Specific impulse" - A term used in > rocketry or munitions, commonly abbreviated (Isp) which rates the > efficiency of a propulsion system by the "impulse" (i.e. the > change in momentum) per unit of propellant. The numerical > dimension of specific impulse is either impulse per unit mass, or > impulse per unit time; differing by a factor of g, the > gravitational acceleration at the surface of the Earth. > > For example, the Specific impulse of hydrogen peroxide as a > monopropellant is about 160-175 (sec), which is most amazing since when > burned as a bipropellant with gasoline, this figure only goes up to > about 225, not even double. And this is only slightly less than hydrogen > burned with liguid oxygen - yet - the net heat energy of the gasoline is > 13 times greater per volume than the heat energy of the peroxide. Huge > anomaly. COP =5 ??? read on.... > > The anomaly, if you need it to be spelled out, is that the heat > energy of the propellant can be only moderately related to its > specific impulse. "Common sense" scientific teaching indicates > otherwise. There are only a couple of chemicals where this > particular anomaly (of heat energy not correlating to thrust) > occurs and they involve phase change. > > A particular terrorist explosive, the name of which need not be > mentioned for present purposes, is quietly in the science news > lately for a number of security-related reasons. But for > alternative energy R&D, the big news of interest is related to a > surprising but little-known physical anomaly of the chemical, > which is even absent from many (all) older University level textbooks. > > That explosive is peroxide based, but very different from conventional > explosives in that it does NOT release heat during the explosion. > > Did the full implications of that feature hit you yet? > > If not, let me repeat: this chemical explosive does not release > heat during the violent explosion! At least not very much. But it will > definitely kill you and creates the normal amount of explosive damage. > > Irony-of ironies ! Would not it be some kind of poetic justice in > the present socio-political climate if the fear-product of Islamic > terrorism led directly to a major alternative-energy advance - which > significantly lowered the demand for Middle-Eastern oil? Not as > farfetched as one might imagine. > > The process of energy conversion in explosives, just like combustion, > normally obeys thermodynamic laws and especially Boyle's Law. The > phase-change conversion of solid or liquid to gas (as in the > steam engine) normally is a product of large energy input and > temperature rise, based on combustion; and normally this results > in around a 1500-1 to 2000-1 volume change; or correspondingly - a > pressure differential of up to 3000 psi max. > > This volume and pressure swing can be easily converted into energy using > an ICE or turbine engine, as is done in power plants all over the world. > This true with or without the heat normally associated with explosions > and Boyle's Law. > > In the spirit of 'swords to plowshares' - the implication of the > aforementioned phase-change, of the bomb-anomaly variety is, of > course, that when an engine is based on a similar chemical > reaction - then the Carnot limitations and other normal measures of > energy/heat content will not apply in the same way as with real > heat engines. In other words, our normal assumptions about the > relationship of heat energy to kinetic energy are flawed in this > limited instance of peroxide-based chemicals. > > This phenomenon - which does utilize phase-change advantageously, does > not suffer the huge losses of compression in an engine, but the > thermodynamic energy balance is more complicated. This phenomenon is > scientifically known as 'Entropic Explosion'. It is reminiscent of the > rapid reaction that produces gas in the safety air-bags of cars during > accidents, where one does not want to substitute a lesser burn-injury > for a major impact injury. > > The Entropic Explosion (EE) phenomenon may serve to explain how > HOOH can be used as a monopropellant rocket fuel when its apparent > energy content is low - much lower than the specific impulse of > exhaust would indicate. > > Compared to burning hydrogen in oxygen, the specific impulse of > HOOH monopropellant shows about a five to one net advantage in > anti-entropy, when graphed against heat energy content of the two base > fuel systems. IOW, Specific impulse converts directly into torque, and > the fact that peroxide has 13 times less heat energy but only two to > three times less isp, means it is five times more efficient (COP is > arguably ~five) and "might" lead to a complicated hybrid device, > incorporating the heat pump, which appears to be overunity. > > If a fuel has a COP of five, and a heat pump has a COP of five, then > even a low efficiency engine and add-on system might suffice to both > make the fuel (on-the-fly) and achieve the same kind of self-running > which can be mis-labeled as "perpetual motion". > > But to bring readers here up to date on what is probably a new > concept to many (i.e. never before mentioned on this forum, as far > as I can tell): An "Entropic Explosion" is defined simply as an > explosion in which the reactants undergo a very large change in volume > and resultant pressure - but without releasing a correspondingly large > amount of heat. You will sometimes see the label "isothermal" expansion > applied to this, but that does not convey the same vigorous connotation.
