Jed Rothwell wrote: > Harry Veeder wrote: > >>> point to bothering with them. We can improve the COP anytime, but >>> that proves nothing and contributes nothing to our understanding of >>> the phenomenon. >> >> It is hypothetical until you try it. It may be that the conditions >> which they think will increase the COP actual decrease the COP. > > Okay, hypothetical. But the methods have been common knowledge since > around 1840, and I doubt you will find many people who do not believe > they work. They work only a little, however.
I am not talking about increasing the COP of a electrochemical cell. That would mean getting the cell to generate more electrical power. I am taking about increasing the COP of a CF cell which happens to be partly electrochemical. This means getting the cell to generate more heat for the same or less input power. Ed claims he knows how this can be done. Why not turn his claim into a testable conjecture? > If you doubt that the textbook methods of improving electrochemical > efficiency work, I suggest you do some electrochemistry yourself. > Calling these methods hypothetical is like saying that Faraday's laws > are hypothetical, and you will not believe that coulumbs = amps * > seconds until I prove it to you. Go test it yourself. When you combine electrochemistry with CF you are entering uncharted territory. Harry
