Sites: GlobalSpec.com | GlobalSpec Electronics | CR4 | Electronics360
Login | Register
The Engineer's Place for News and Discussion®

Previous in Forum: Nanotech Liquids Quickly Stop Bleeding   Next in Forum: Using the Brain to Control Video Games
Close

Comments Format:






Close

Subscribe to Discussion:

CR4 allows you to "subscribe" to a discussion
so that you can be notified of new comments to
the discussion via email.

Close

Rating Vote:







Page 1 of 2: « First 1 2 Next > Last »
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80

Air as a Source of Energy

10/10/2006 11:40 AM

There is a technology on producing energy without any kind of fuel. This technology is a combination of processes that are well tested and now in use in different industries and research projects. I am assuring all that this project is just need to be made and improved. All the basic experiments had been already done successfully and enough data had been gathered. In short, it is a new and exciting kind of technology and as far as I know, nothing like this exists this day. This technology works in this way. The scheme is basically aimed as producing electricity by extracting heat from atmosphere. In this project, this is done by using mechanical arrangement similar to heat pump. This system is used to squeeze energy from huge volumes of air and to produce temperature difference by which energy can be produced. It is to be noted that fresh water and salt are added bonus to this project, as salty brackish water can be used in this project. This is done by vaporizing water inside an enclosed container named "Evaporator" with the help of a vacuum pump. As the vacuum pump sucks air from the container, the water inside began to evaporate and in this process collects its latent heat of vaporization from water. For that reason, the water inside becomes colder and heat began to flow in from outside. Thus in effect, the latent heat of vaporization of water is collected from outside atmosphere. In the open-cycle OTEC, vapor is produced in the same manner and on experiment it was found that to have vapor flow rate of 1 kg/sec, power needed at the vacuum pump is 3 KW. Whereas, the latent heat embedded in 1 kg of vapor is 2.31 MW. After the vapor is produced, it is heated further with adiabatically compressed, hot air. After heating the vapor in the Boiler, the hot, compressed air is passed through the Evaporator to give up its residue heat to the water inside. The process is the same as that of common heat pumps sold in the market. And finally, the temp. diff. between the Boiler and the Condenser is created by suddenly releasing the compressed air at the Condenser. And thus a system of real efficiency of >50% is created. Though this technology is a combination of processes that are tested, but due to lack of finance, I haven't been able to make a working prototype yet. After reading this basic description, many said that this technology violates 2nd law of thermodynamics. But whenever I have challenged them to calculate the entropy of the whole process and prove that, none has done that yet. I just want to know about the opinion of other experts and knowledgeble persons that if a technology is a combination of processes that in reality exist, how can that violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics. At this stage, I am now searching for assistance to build a prototype and test, if anybody can help me in this regard, kindly tell me.

Register to Reply
Pathfinder Tags: alternative energy electricity generation mechanical engineering
Interested in this topic? By joining CR4 you can "subscribe" to
this discussion and receive notification when new comments are added.

Comments rated to be "almost" Good Answers:

Check out these comments that don't yet have enough votes to be "official" good answers and, if you agree with them, rate them!
Guru
New Zealand - Member - Kiwi Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Engineering Fields - Power Engineering - New Member Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 6308
Good Answers: 253
#1

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/10/2006 3:16 PM

Something doesn't sound right here (ie- is seriously wrong). From what I can see here your talking about a theoretical system with an efficiency of > 38,000% (if you are talking about extracting 2.31 MW with a 3kW input and 50% system efficiency). Doesn't that seem a little.......odd when you stand back and think about it. Something is screwy with your theoretical knowledge and/or calculations.

Lets just stand back and think about how this would actually work (ie- model the prototype virtually in our heads, not with a computer, as a practical application).

How is your final temperature difference at the systems output being harnessed? Lets step back even further, compare your system with a standard 3kW radient heater (as a simple modeling example). Do you really expect the temperature difference of your system to put out more heat than 380 of these side by side, how about 100, how about just one 3kW radient heater. If it works the way you think it works, just how high is your temperature difference. Compare with a similar system (and its heat output, efficiency, infrastructure required, physics involved, etc) in the practical world (eg- gas, steam, geothermal, nuclear turbine plant, etc). Does it look so much better than these on paper. If it does, why?

Telling you that it violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics, or that you cannot get more energy out than you put in is not that helpful (but is is a short answer). Better that you are given hints on what to look at to find out why it does not work in the way you think it will work yourself. That is how we all learn and remember, so that the mistakes of the past are not repeated in the future.

__________________
jack of all trades
Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Anonymous Poster
#3
In reply to #1

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/12/2006 11:52 AM

There is nothing screwy in it. It has happened in real experiment. I have got this data from the experiment of open-cycle OTEC. You can find the description of that experiment on http://www.otecnews.org/articles/vega/07_landbased_OTEC.html. On that experiment, a 26 kg/sec flow of steam has been achieved by spending just 80 Kw at the vacuum pump i.e. compressors in the term of the experiement. KINDLY DON'T MAKE ANY REMARK BEFORE THROUGHLY VIEWING OF THE WEBPAGE.

Register to Reply
Guru
New Zealand - Member - Kiwi Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Engineering Fields - Power Engineering - New Member Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 6308
Good Answers: 253
#6
In reply to #3

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/12/2006 3:18 PM

Wo there Mr shouty 'guest'. Don't get angry at me because I didn't review the web page on this OC-OTEC plant example (I am not a mind reader you know) that doesn't in any way change what I wrote in my post whatsoever.

I don't care that a 26 kg/sec flow of steam has been achieved by spending just 80 Kw at the vacuum pump and how it relates to the 1 kg/sec flow with a 3kW vacuum pump mentioned above (hence the fact that I never mentioned it). It is completely irrelevant to what I was talking about. Did you even read my post? What do you think I am talking about? (it was system efficiency and power generation by the way). As a side note, did you read what the theoretical efficiency of the power generation of that plant was compared to the above system?

Please kindly provide some more information and reasoning behind your comments.

__________________
jack of all trades
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#11
In reply to #6

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/15/2006 8:07 AM

The relation is plain and simple, IF YOU ARE WILLING TO UNDERSTAND. IF YOU CAN GEAT 26 KG/SEC FLOW OF STEAM WITH 80 KW, HOW MUCH WILL TAKE TO HAVE A FLOW RATE OF 1 KG/SEC, SIMPLE ARITHMATIC AND THE ANSWER IS NEARLY ABOUT 3 KW. THEN, HOW MUCH ENERGY IS EMBEDDED IN 1 KG OF STEAM AS LATENT HEAT, THE ANSWER IS 550X1000X4.2 J. JUST CALCULATE THE AMOUNT BY YOURSELF, IF YOUR ARE WILLING.

Register to Reply
Guru
New Zealand - Member - Kiwi Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Engineering Fields - Power Engineering - New Member Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 6308
Good Answers: 253
#19
In reply to #11

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/15/2006 3:53 PM

Ok, i'm not debating your theoretical calculations. Lets try a different angle. In your first post you wrote - <.....have theoretically developed a technology on producing energy without any kind of fuel>, <The scheme is basically aimed as producing electricity by extracting heat from atmosphere>.

Could you answer a few simple questions to help clear some things up. Simplyfing your system down to a 'black box' example (i.e.- only concentrating on what goes in to, and what comes out of the system as a whole).

(1) How were you planning to harness the energy from this heat for actual practical use (i.e.- converting this heat change to electrical power)?

(2) Is there only one 3kW compressor powering the electrical side of the system, or are you also obtaining an additional external source of compressed air which is generated by another compressor. Are there any other electrically powered heat sources in your system?

(3) What is the actual total electrical power input in watts into your system (including all compressors, electrical heat sources, etc).

(4) You talk about an actual efficiency of >50% for the created temperature difference, but what is expected power output in watts out of your system (including the final generation element that converts the heat to electrical watts)?

(5) Hence, what actual electrical generation efficiency (watts out VS watts in) do you expect to get?

This is all a bit long-winded, but there appears to have been some confusion (possibly caused by example oversimplification between the two different fields of Physics and Electrical Engineering). I am genuinely interested but cannot quite understand how you are producing power (i.e.- free energy) with a system who's efficiency is <100%.

__________________
jack of all trades
Register to Reply Score 1 for Good Answer
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#24
In reply to #19

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/16/2006 8:24 AM

1) First, I use the heat to vaporise water. The water is inside and enclosed container and with the help of a vacuum pump, it is vaporised. The vaporisation caused cooling of water inside as the vaporised water collects its latent heat of vaporisation from the water inside. But the container is metallic and as the temp. of water inside container is lowered, heat flows in from outside through the metallic walls. Thus, if the metallic container is designed to have sufficient surface are for heat transfer, after a few seconds, an equlibrum will occur when the heat flowing in from outside atmosphere will be equal to latent heat of vaporisation of water that is vaporising inside in unit time. Thus the vacuum pump will act as a heat pump for turning water into water vapor. In this process, as I have previously mentioned only 3 kw in necessary at the vacuum pump to produce a vapor flow of 1 kg/sec. 2)After the vapor being produced, it is heated by hot, compressed air. Air is compressed adiabatically to a high temp. and this hot, compressed air will be blown (not released) inside Boiler and there the vapor will be blown in the opposite direction. Thus a counter current heating is set up inside Boiler and we will get efficient heat exchange between the compressed air and the Boiler. After heating the vapor, the compresed air will be passed through other two heat exchange phases and its temp. will be lowered to atmospheric temp. Then, it is released adiabatically inside the Condenser. Thus the same compressed air will be used to heat up the vapor inside Boiler and cool the vapor in the condense and thus producing the necessary temp. diff. to run a turbine and produce electricity. The system will have a c.o.p of 3, which can be achieveble with present available technology. If 230 kw of electricity is used to compress the air, it will supply 690 kw of heat to the vapor. Its actual function is to make the necessary temp. diff. to produce electricity. 3)In a system of vapor flow of 1 kg/sec, the total input would be 250 kw of electricity and output would be 1.5 Mw of electricity gross. So, there would be a net output of 1.25 Mw of electricity. 4)The vacuump pump will work as a heat pump and have very high c.o.p, you can calculate that. The vapor heating system i.e. the compressed air system will also have c.o.p of 3. Together they can add 3 Mw of heat to a vapor flow of 1 kg/sec. With 50% efficiency, the output would be 1.5 Mw. 5)In my introductory writing, I have clearly mentioned that I will expect an electricity generation efficiency of 50%.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#33
In reply to #6

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/07/2006 8:42 PM

Let's be rational, I have often made this mistake myself, put a junk figure into a calculation, and junk will come out. I think here we need to look at this 2,270 kj/kg figure, a Watt is a joule per second. Question:- "Is this proposed plant going to condense one litre of water per second?" The low pressure steam turbine blades in regular power plants, are badly worn by wet steam, as the condensation temperature is about 40 degrees celcius. There are megawatts of energy still available, but it is far too low grade heat, to squeeze much more juice from it. The Lockheed OTEC project has investigated many refrigerant gases, boiled via heat exchange, driving a secondary turbine. those gases need to be condensed as well. OTEC draws cold water from deep under the ocean for this purpose. Without a temperature difference, there is no power output. (Carnot Cycle) here is some useful gen on water

Some common used thermal properties for water:

  • Density at 4 oC - 1,000 kg/m3, 62.43 Lbs./Cu.Ft, 8.33 Lbs./Gal., 0.1337 Cu.Ft./Gal.
  • Freezing temperature - 0 oC
  • Boiling temperature - 100 oC
  • Latent heat of melting - 334 kJ/kg
  • Latent heat of evaporation - 2,270 kJ/kg
  • Critical temperature - 380 - 386 oC
  • Critical pressure - 23.520 kN/m2
  • Specific heat capacity water - 4.187 kJ/kgK
  • Specific heat capacity ice - 2.108 kJ/kgK
  • Specific heat capacity water vapor - 1.996 kJ/kgK
  • Thermal expansion from 4 oC to 100 oC - 4.2x10-2
  • Bulk modulus elasticity - 2,068,500 kN/m2
__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#37
In reply to #33

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/10/2006 8:58 AM

Your question can be answered and ONLY be answered by experiment only. ONLY experiment can give the real data and amount of air needed to condense the water in the condenser. What you have said is a technical problem, if that exist in present day thermal power plants, this technology can also coup up with that, because in this technology, the temp. of the water after being heated in the Boiler is not much less that of a conventional thermal power plant.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#41
In reply to #37

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/10/2006 10:00 AM

Hi and Namastee if you come from India, Please allow me to differ from your assertion that "ONLY experiment can give the real data...." There is the 'Rule of Ten' that applies here. It is ten times more costly to correct a mistake at each stage of a project, from inception to final commission of any manufactured device. That can ammount to 10 x10 x 10 if one is not careful at each stage. Computers now are at a level of sophistication that a great deal of modelling can be accomplished in a 'virtual' experiment. We have had well over a century of tried and tested data, with which to input a virtual model. The Rankine Cycle is more appropriate here than 'Carnot' I am slightly mystefied as to why you regard the introduction of compressed air into a wet steam system as desireable? Conventional steam turbine power generation is set up to exclude as much air as possible, Daltons law of partial pressures may apply? I will hve to put my thinking cap on for that(Cone with a big 'D') Why just heat from air? a black selectively coated tube inside an evacuated glass tube (coated to allow short IR and reflect back long IR a thin gold deposit was assessed by Pilkington Glass as probably best) would get quite hot in the sunshine. A supply of cool water from an aquafer might be sustainable for the intended lifespan of this proposed power plant? that would be the direction I personally would investigate. Thanks for all the enthusiasm, never lose it, as it tends to be infectious, and generally that is good. but enthusiasm needs to be moderated to avoid dissappointment.

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#42
In reply to #41

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/10/2006 12:54 PM

Thank you for your reply. I am not introducing compressed air into wet steam. The compressed, hot air will be contained inside pipes and heat will be transfered to the steam through the walls of the pipe by heat exchange in conduction mode. The model you have proposed is a solar thermal type and have drawbacks, the tube will take sufficiently long time to heat up and in the night and in cloudy condition, the plant wouldn't work. This technology will devoid of such drawbacks, this is like a thermal power plant without fuel. A thermal power plant will continue in any condition. This technology too will continue in any condition except when the temp. outside is below freezing. In the tropics, sufficient heat is stored in the atmosphere, a way of tapping it will not only save out depleting fossil fuel reserve, but also save the environment.

You have said that you have sufficient experience in making virtual prototypes. If I have sufficient fund to pay you, I will offer you to make one at once. But just for this reason, I have been stuck on a point for a long time. Actually, in my opinion, a virtual prototype will work better than a real one to proof the feasibility of this technology. But, for this reason, I am unable to say anything to you now. If you want to further investigate on this technology, what you have to do is just to sign an NDA (Non-Disclosure Agreement) and send that to my home address. If you are curious enough and ready to do, kindly mail me at pranabjyoti_calcutta@rediffmail.com.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#43
In reply to #42

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/10/2006 2:03 PM

With a name that begins with 'breath of life' I can see the enthusiasm for warm air. As to non disclosure aggreements, I would need to confirm that with a superior. i.e. it would need to be formally drawn up. The virtual software I referred to, requires several gig of ram to run, and is sadly not cheap! . We do have a licence for it though. I am not very experienced with it myself, but know who is. I still have my 'L' plates. The program is highly adaptable. At the end there is a full set of engineering drawings. ready for manufacture. Also an animated forward/reverse explosion of all component parts to assist fabrication on the shop floor. This is the start of a new era in manufacturing. needless to say, language is no problem. There is a huge database of costed ready made components to select from, as it is usually better not to remanufacture a standard item. Choose from these three, two choises only 'Fast, Good, Cheap' is the old motto. This software is available now with well over a hundred and fifty thousand drawing offices worldwide. India no exception.

Now let's talk sane. Heat exchangers are as old as the hills by now. a car radiator is a typical example. The scrap yard may well be the best place to try your idea out. That radiator might even come with a 12 or 24 volt electric fan. if it's broke? mend it, and sell it after as reconditioned. Try to source a vacuum pump, and make that two radiators, you will need to pump cold water through the second one, at the condensor end. The turbine may well need to be bespoke. Then you will have a 'back shed' demonstration plant. Investors like to see something working for themselves in reality, not just on a computer screen. Even if it has a low output the mathematics are very favourable for scaling up. check it out! big is very beautiful with steam turbines. Power plant from utilities are often decommissioned with plenty of life left. nothing to make, other than a heat exchange unit. I am very intrigued as to how your propsed plant would differ? 2% to 3% at best, C.O.P. is my back of an envelope calculation. But that requires cold water at the condenser end. and at least 313K for the warm air. It might be a merry experry before the buldozers move in? 2.5 megawatts is possible.

What's the difference spraying 313K water into an evaporation chamber, and your proposal? ... that's my bewilderment.

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#44
In reply to #43

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/10/2006 9:18 PM

I will certainly start as soon as you have said, if there is a formal "junkyard" exist in my country. India has a huge population of unemployed poor and any scrap metal is defabricated and sold to market just in a blink. There is no hope of finding a radiator and a fan from a scrapyard, as scrapyard doesn't exist. The problem is now funding, making a small scale prototype would be no problem at all. I have talked with Canadian Scientist Ben Wien and he said that he can take care of prototype making at a cost of $35000 in canadian funds. This amount is still a lot for me. What is necessary is a financer, in about $100,000, even patenting would be completed. After that, what is needed is licensing this technology to electric utility companies.

Temp. far less than 313K, even 278K would be enough to run the plant. This technology is in fact spraying water inside an evaporation chamber and production of vapor by this way. Next, the heating of vapor with compressed in counter current method. The electricity generation would be just like a thermal power. You are right at this point, a thermal power would be a very good place with modifications of an evaporation chamber and a totally new kind of Boiler, to run this technology. Even with this modifications, a running thermal power plant can be changed to this technology. The plants will then produce clear energy only and would have depend on none for carbon credit.

You haven't mentioned, in which kind of offices, the softwire is available now.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#45
In reply to #44

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/11/2006 6:51 AM

GlobalSpec are the best people to advise on the right software. As I said I am still wearing 'L' plates (learner driver). I am not properly qualified to advise!

Now first things first, you will definitely need to plot an enthalpy/entrpoy graph of your system. The size of the 'area' will give a good estimate of the output.

Before that is done, no sane investor will touch the project with a long barge pole.

Good Luck,

Alastair

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#46
In reply to #45

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/11/2006 8:43 AM

Though I haven't made graph, but I have energy input and output calculations by myself. If someone will ask for that, I will send him/her the calculations and other data that I have collected from various sources. If you need that, I can send that to you personally.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#47
In reply to #45

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/11/2006 6:48 PM

Hugh Wright MA. Brooks & Martin, Tunbridge Wells ,Kent. UK Patent Attourney (Brooks by the way patented 'Viagra' tut tut) was once CEO of the UK Central Electricity Generating Board Patent Division, before he moved to Brooks & Martin. I believe he recieved a 'novel' scheme to employ 'heat pumps' to generate electricity, two or three times a week.

But by all means ask him yourself. it will only cost an email.

This does not mean he rejected every single proposal, he just examined each one carefully.

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#49
In reply to #47

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/12/2006 12:05 AM

Can you give me his e-mail address?

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#51
In reply to #49

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/12/2006 10:40 AM

Sure, Try:- http://www.brookesbatchellor.co.uk/contactus.htm

The company is now called Brookes Batchellor, Brooks & Martin by the way were one of the oldest UK Patent Agents. I see that Dear Hugh is still there. but please do that entropy/enthalpy plot first. even before contacting him. otherwise you will be wasting both your times. Hugh will just pass you to a secretary who will write a polite letter, asking for the entropy/enthalpy plot if you have one.

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Anonymous Poster
#9
In reply to #3

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/13/2006 2:03 PM

OTEC makes use of an existing temperature difference.

This proposal claims to create one and then profit thereby.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#68
In reply to #1

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/19/2006 2:26 AM

Hi Jack of All Trades, I have had time to examine Pranabjhoti's scheme, and one aspect that in your words 'sounds screwey' is Pranab's assertion that you can use a heat pump willy-nilly to raise air to any temperature that comes off the top of one's head, and do it without the slightest regard to 'Carnot' or the derived Coefficient of Performance, c.o.p. is entirely dependent on that 'temperature rise' i.e. the higher the rise, the lower the c.o.p. Stacking heat pumps together is not going to make a blind bit of difference to the ultimate c.o.p. Nor is any amount of fancy word jugglry about cross-flow heat exchange going to alter the fundamental Laws of Thermodynamics.

The best proposition for extracting energy from air, as I recall from my College days, yonks and yonks ago, was published in a mid 1960'3 Issue of Scientific American. Coincidentally as I try to read from failing photographic memory, the artical relies on cross flow heat exchange.....I can't quite make out the working fluid, but I think it may be Sodium Hydroxide,......The idea is to evaporate a solution of sodium hydroxide (much like laundry dries on a line) and via cross-flow heat exchange constantly replenish the wet 'laundry' with dilute Sodium Hydroxide........The consentrated NaOH returns via cross-flow heat exchange to the 'boiler' here hot water(heated itself by cross-flow heat exchange) is mixed with the cross-flow heated NaOH and the chemistry ensures the mixture increases in heat........ This 'Stacked' system makes sense, The mathematics add up, sadly in my view, Pranab's mathamatics is in error, specifically his interpretation of Carnot efficiency in a stacked heat pump arrangement. If anyone out there can locate that paper from Scientific American, I would be extremely gratefull. memory has faded somewhat......Don't fret Pranab, perpetual motion is a 'Right of Passage' for most Scientists, the 'Impossible Dream'

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#69
In reply to #68

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/20/2006 10:50 PM

What you have talked about is the temp. rise of whole of working fluid and if its distributed evenly. What croos-flow and counter current means is the uneven conitnuous distribution of heat to the working fluid.

What Jack of all trades said "screwey" is the c.o.p of the vacuum pump. To him, it is unbelieveble that 1 kg/sec flow of steam is achieved by just spending 3 kw at the heat pump. But, what is fact, is fact, is fact,.................is fact.

Mr. Carnegie, please suggest the paper where you have find that stacking heat pumps together i.e. putting them in a row and release of the heat of the compressed gas in separate steps means no diff. in the derieved performence of the heat pump. I have searched books and the net, but found nothing yet. The book of thermodynamics, I used to read at my college, says nothing about that. I am also surprised to find that, if putting engines in a row can make a diff. in their efficiency, why putting multiple sinks in a row doesn't make any diff. As far as my knowledge of physics says, higher the temp. of the sink means less heat will be transfered from working fluid to the sink and that means less c.o.p. How release of heat in multiple steps makes no diff., goes beyond my common sense.

Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#70
In reply to #68

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/21/2006 8:59 AM

Mr. Carnegie, Actually most engineers have little or no idea about the power of counter and cross current flow in heat exchange. If you want to learn about that, kindly search the net about "maisotsenko cycle" and "uehara cycle". In the website mention here (http://www.idalex.com/technology/index.htm), Dr. Myron Tribus said that he had made the same mistake as you and others are making now about my technology, but, thanks to Dr. Tribus, he had admitted that he was wrong and openly appreciated maisotsenko cycle as great enhancer in efficiency of electric utility plants and air conditioning equipments. Dr. William Worek had also made the same kind of remarks. THIS IS A VERY GOOD EXAMPLE OF THE EFFICIENCY OF COUNTER CURRENT AND CROSS CURRENT HEAT EXCHANGE AND HOW WITHOUT PROPER JUDGEMENT, MANY HAD TURNED THAT CYCLES AS PERPETUAL MOTION CYCLE AND VIOLATION OF 2ND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS. From my very first posting, I have repeatedly told that this technology is based on REAL experiments. But, unfortunately, you and others have just ignored that and go on finding a "fault" of that technology. Dr. Tribus had openly admitted his fault, I am just waiting for that time when the people of cr4 will do the same.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#71
In reply to #70

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/21/2006 10:41 PM

Pranabjhoti, The Carnot derived C.O.P. is for a 'PERFECT' idealized system, lower temperature divided by temperature difference, in Kelvin. Very simple really. The 'Reductio ad Absurbum' position you appear to be adopting would have us making perpetual motion machines. Dr. Myron Tribus would be stripped of his Phd. if he suggested a way to overcome Carnot, He Certainly does not, he suggests there might be a slight improvement to the figure or merit, commonly 'Z'.

Introducing 'stacked systems' & 'cross-flow' heat exchange in my view is quite simply 'Ignorantio Elenchi'

fallacy of:
ambiguity
accident
amphiboly
begging the question
equivocation
non causa pro causa
post hoc ergo propter hoc
hasty generalization
ignorantio elenchi
tu quoque

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#72
In reply to #71

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/21/2006 11:36 PM

Postscript:-

Pananabjhoti, This may help?

Check out:- http://www.wolfram.com/r/mathwire41/modelica

And also http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=1494089

All about 'Enthalpies of Dilution' You might just get this system to work? but forget crossing swords with Carnot, he will deflate your balloon.

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#77
In reply to #71

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/23/2006 11:46 AM

In the 'PERFECT' idealised system, it is assumed that there is only one sink and heat is supplied to the fluid homogenously that's why the temp. of the sink is same all over. Actually, the real formulaefor c.o.p is Q/W, the formula you have said is applicable and only applicable when the condition, that is said above, exists. I think that Dr. Tribus should understand that and the persons, who will stripp of his Phd. A book of thermodynamics is right in front of me and what I have said is based on the process written on that book, how the formulae of c.o.p of heat pump is derived from a 'PERFECT' idealised Carnot cycle.

If going beyond wet bulb temp. with evaporative cooling cycle and approaching dew point is just a "slight improvement", I don't know what great achievement is. In the page (http://www.idalex.com/technology/how_it_works.htm), it is clearly written that "This last paragraph will forever change the way textbooks are now written. The Coolerado Cooler using the Maisotsenko Cycle has achieved real (NOT theoretical) temperatures below the wet bulb and approaching the dew point. Some recently published works deemed this impossible". By giving permission to add his comment with this page, as per you, Dr. Tribus would have done something that can strrip him of his Phd, but till this day, I have no news of that.

At last, I think you have a good knowledge of Latin, but that is of no use to me.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#145
In reply to #70

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

12/09/2006 4:39 AM

You Write:-"THIS IS A VERY GOOD EXAMPLE OF THE EFFICIENCY OF COUNTER CURRENT AND CROSS CURRENT HEAT EXCHANGE AND HOW WITHOUT PROPER JUDGEMENT, MANY HAD TURNED THAT CYCLES AS PERPETUAL MOTION CYCLE AND VIOLATION OF 2ND LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS."

I am lost for words Pranab, Insulate the Houston Astrodome, to near perfection, place your machine into it. Will it still run? when will it stop?

There is an old joke about the famous Bessler Wheel.

Check out :- http://www.besslerwheel.com/firstlaw.html

Quote:- "In 1712, Johann Bessler built a machine that he claimed was self-moving. By 1717, he had convinced thousands of people, from the ordinary to the eminent, that he had indeed discovered the secret of a self-sustaining mechanism. The machine underwent numerous tests and passed rigorous inspections. It was made to do heavy work for long periods, and in an official test it ran continuously for 54 days.

The internal design of the machine was always closely guarded by its inventor. Plagued by paranoia and a nasty temper, and with no patent laws to protect him, Bessler never arranged payment terms for the wheel. A bitter man, he took his secret to the grave and drifted into obscurity.

This web site strives to shed light on the Bessler mystery through an exchange of ideas among enthusiasts, dabblers, believers, skeptics, critics, and all who share a fascination with the "impossible."

1717

Spring
Bessler's last and largest wheel was completed at Castle Weissenstein. It was 6½ ells in diameter (about 12 feet), about 18 inches wide, and turned at 26 revolutions per minute. It continuously lifted heavy stamps for printing and raised water with an Archimedean screw.

November
Prince Karl arranged the most rigorous official test of Bessler's wheel at Castle Weissenstein. Participants included the Court Architect of the Austrian Emperor Baron Fischer and Professor Willem 'sGravesande - a close friend of Isaac Newton. The machine underwent a 54 day test in a locked and sealed room, during which time the examiners were allowed spontaneous entry. At all times the machine was found to be turning at its regular 26 revolutions per minute. The investigators publicly certified that the wheel was genuine and that no sign of fraud could be found."

************************************************************

The joke was that Prince Karl, who we learn was the only person to ever see the workings of this very simple Wheel, was also strapped for cash. (true)

So he went about mass production of these wheels and stored a whole load of them under lock and key in a room deep in his castle. 14 ft thick walls as well.

One day a prospective merchant came to buy Prince Karl's entire stock of wheels, about a hundred or so. He needed to make sure they all worked, so every wheel was set in motion. The merchant said that any that were still going round after a week, he would purchase at the agreed price. Prince Karl was delighted and a great banquet was prepared in honour of their esteemed guest. Each wheel had an output of several horsepower.

Sometime that week a dreadful fire broke out and gutted Prince Karl's Magnificent Castle......The unlucky Prince had discounted the megawatts of heat produced by these Bressler Wheels......They were all made of wood......

But like all good fairy tales the storey has a happy ending. LLoys of London The insurance fellows were doing a great trade in the London Coffee Houses. Many nobles were faced with crippling costs repairing their castles and stately homes, Dry Rot, Wet Rot, Tommy Rot, you name it. Help was at hand, The now displaced Prince Karl, wandering lonely and penniless, met the beautiful daughter of a Toy Maker. Pinocchio was his name I think..... to cut the fairy tale short, Old Mr. Pinocchio made a toy Bessler Wheel, and put it up in a little box....That also caught fire after a few days.

Nobles and Landed Gentry flocked to Pinocchio's Toy Shop to buy the toy Bessler Wheels. Old Mr. Pinocchio became so rich he was able to offer a hansom dowry for his Pretty Daughter's hand in Marriage, enough even to repair Prince Karl's Castle.

So, sweet dreams children....They all lived happily ever after.

We hear that a lot of Lloyd's Underwriters went bankrupt soon after.

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - HAM Radio - New Member United Kingdom - Big Ben - New Member Fans of Old Computers - Altair 8800 - New Member Canada - Member - New Member

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3576
Good Answers: 95
#2

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/10/2006 11:22 PM

This sounds like the old tanstaaffl machine.

google it

__________________
Per Ardua Ad Astra
Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - HAM Radio - New Member United Kingdom - Big Ben - New Member Fans of Old Computers - Altair 8800 - New Member Canada - Member - New Member

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3576
Good Answers: 95
#4
In reply to #2

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/12/2006 12:05 PM

This has potential.

Surface water on the tropics is very warm, yet a few hundred feet down you can find 4C water below the thermocline.

by operating a thermal cycle between 4C and 24C with some working fluid you can extract energy from this difference.

The work fluid can be a freon or even water in a vaccuum chamber as it can boil and 24C and condense at 4C giving you brine and pure water.

You can even run a steam turbine in there mush like large lanbased plants, but the turbine must be optimised for the far lower mass rates and preseeure differentials.

Worth working on...lots of oceans out there.

__________________
Per Ardua Ad Astra
Register to Reply
Guru
United Kingdom - Member - Olde Member!! Engineering Fields - Instrumentation Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Dunstable, England
Posts: 2810
Good Answers: 44
#5
In reply to #4

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/12/2006 1:53 PM

Hmmmmmmm wonder what the environmental impact will be from extracting this energy from the sea?

Maybe nothing noticeable as the sea must have a huge thermal mass?

John.

__________________
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing - Googling is far worse!
Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - HAM Radio - New Member United Kingdom - Big Ben - New Member Fans of Old Computers - Altair 8800 - New Member Canada - Member - New Member

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3576
Good Answers: 95
#7
In reply to #5

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/12/2006 4:10 PM

Yes, sae is big accumulator of suns rays.

Big problem is to make it efficient as you are working with small temp/pressure differences compared to traditional power generators

__________________
Per Ardua Ad Astra
Register to Reply
Participant

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 2
#8

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/13/2006 11:52 AM

hai u just read th 2 nd law of thermodynamics in depth of the equation there's exact meaning of that with help of 2 natural resource u can do this all the best Regards Prakash

Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - HAM Radio - New Member United Kingdom - Big Ben - New Member Fans of Old Computers - Altair 8800 - New Member Canada - Member - New Member

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3576
Good Answers: 95
#10
In reply to #8

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/13/2006 2:48 PM

Well, they are operating a carnot machine between two close temperatures, so the efficiency will be low, however the cost of the fuel is just pumping energy and if you can use surface waves as ram pump energy you can avoid that.

__________________
Per Ardua Ad Astra
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#12

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/15/2006 8:32 AM

I have read all the messages that are sent by readers. Thanks to them for spending their valuable time and thinking on that technology. But, sorry to use, none has tried to understand the technology properly. This technology just takes a process from open-cycle OTEC, that is vacuum evaporation of water. Even this process isn't unique to open-cycle OTEC, for long time as far as I know, this is used in salt industries for salt production. But on one point, OC-OTEC first used the vapor for energy production and opens a new frontier for energy technology. In common thermal powe plants, a huge share of the heat, got by burning fuel, is wasted as latent heat of vaporisation of water. As for example, if we start with 1 gm of water at 30C and end at vapor at 300C, then 2/3rd of the heat is used as latent heat of vaporisation. You can calculate that by using data that can be find in 10th standard books. If, we first make the vapor with a vacuum pump and then heat that vapor to 300C, then only 1/3 amount of fuel will be nedded to make the same amount of electricity. On the next phase, there is question of heating the vapor. Instead of burning fuel, why don't we use a heat pump to heat up that vapor. And by by using counter current flow of fluids in the Boiler, we can get efficient heating of the vapor and with a heat pump of c.o.p 3, we can heat up that vapor to 300C. Thus we get hot vapor without using any kind of fuel. The next step is just flowing of that vapor through turbine and production of electricity. THIS, BY ANY WAY, DOESN'T VIOLATE ANY LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS. I have this technology well documented and with sketches stored to me. If anybody is willing to review the technology further, then kindly contact me at pranabjyoti_calcutta@rediffmail.com

Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - HAM Radio - New Member United Kingdom - Big Ben - New Member Fans of Old Computers - Altair 8800 - New Member Canada - Member - New Member

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3576
Good Answers: 95
#13
In reply to #12

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/15/2006 8:42 AM

well, if you use a vaccum to make water vapor the heat of vaporization comes from the water, which gets cooler. Keep it up and it will freeze. Pump in new warm water and you can keep on getting this vapor. Bear in mind this is a vacuum vapor at a pressure of 20MM of water it will hardly turn a turbine and you will need a condensing plate as well.

now otec states that it runs thermal engines between deep cold and surface water at 20C difference. I understand this.

http://www.nrel.gov/otec/what.html

Your idea of compressing the air etc etc is not a valid way to generate energy. Thus you are not a a real physics graduate.

__________________
Per Ardua Ad Astra
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#14
In reply to #13

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/15/2006 10:18 AM

I am not interested in OC-OTEC, I am interested in just a part of that. You haven't noticed that I amn't using the vapor to run a turbine. If vapor is produced in this way, we get the latent heat of vaporisation from surrounding atmosphere. How? The water will be inside a metallic container. As it become colder, it will suck heat from outside atmosphere. It has a huge heat content and its temp. lowering by this process can be neglected. Thus, after a few seconds, an equlibrum will be reached where the amount of heat enetering the water from outside atmosphere through the metallic walls of the container will be equal to amount of latent heat of the vaporised water in unit time i.e. second. This can also be achieved by flowing the water through pipes and spraying that inside the "evaporator", the metallic container, containing the water. In my technology, I have a condenser to at the other end of the turbine. You may have asked that to me before making a remark. Like an astologer or a messiah of physics, you have announced that "Your idea of compressing the air etc etc is not a valid way to generate energy". How do you know that? If there is a theory regarding that, kindly tell me. Or you have said so, because it is not created yet. Those who think in this way, in my opinion, are incompetent to say the word "science", not even "physics".

Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - HAM Radio - New Member United Kingdom - Big Ben - New Member Fans of Old Computers - Altair 8800 - New Member Canada - Member - New Member

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3576
Good Answers: 95
#15
In reply to #14

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/15/2006 10:34 AM

You can indeed make a solar or atmospheric still by diving a space into two parts and drawing a vacuum on it.

Once the air is gone from the salt water you will indeed be able to transfer water from one side to the other by heating one side by sun/air and cooling the other side by shade/water. Simple solar stills like this are made at atmospheric pressure already with clear film as a solar window and shade for the cold side. Will it work better in a vacuum? yes, but the cost to draw the vaccuum is there.

Simple, use deep sea water as one side and warm sea water to boil away a working fluid at a temp and pressure where it will condense on the cold side. No need for air in it. Just heat exchangers.

warm water has almost 2000 times the heat per degree C per CC compared to air.

I am sure you will not get financial support for your system until you can make a proof of concept to show people.

Any competent physicist should be able to make this for $200 or less. Once you have this, let people look at it and see if they want to give you $$ to make a larger one.

__________________
Per Ardua Ad Astra
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#16
In reply to #15

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/15/2006 11:45 AM

As far as I know, solar stills are used only for making fresh water, not electricity. We can get much more output by using the vacuum pump. In your example, the latent of vapor is wasted because it is not used in electricity production. If it is used in electricity production, its output will far exceed the cost of making vacuum. You are limited by what is availbel at present, but it is new invention and if you think what is available at present is ultimate and what we have to do is just minor improvement of them, I have nothing to say to you. This technology is a combination of processes that are now in use. I think it is enough for proof of concept. The open-cycle OTEC dats proves the c.o.p of vacuum pump in producing vapor. The production of hot, compressed air by compressors is similar to the working of heat pumps available in the market. Do you know any physicist, who can make a proof of concept by just $200?

Register to Reply
Guru
United Kingdom - Member - Olde Member!! Engineering Fields - Instrumentation Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Dunstable, England
Posts: 2810
Good Answers: 44
#17
In reply to #16

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/15/2006 1:36 PM

I think aurizon is making the most sense here...

paran if it works as well as you say then I'm surprised sponsors haven't thrown tonnes of money your way already, if you've only just started along this idea then be prepared to be inundated with offers...

'Fraid I can't see what the excitement is about, sorry!

John.

__________________
A little knowledge is a dangerous thing - Googling is far worse!
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#18
In reply to #17

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/15/2006 1:53 PM

Yes, but for that, I have to built a prototype and that cost is now beyond my reach. I have tried that and I already have a business partner and together we are now looking for grants to start.

Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - HAM Radio - New Member United Kingdom - Big Ben - New Member Fans of Old Computers - Altair 8800 - New Member Canada - Member - New Member

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3576
Good Answers: 95
#20
In reply to #16

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/15/2006 5:15 PM

Yes, Any capable physicist would be able to make a small scale mockup to see if this would work in the first place. A small 12 VDC comprssor and a volt and amp meter.

section of 6" ABS pipe as 2 3 foot sections coupled by a reduction fitting and a valve in between. With end cap adaptors to 1" pipe and a valve. A foot pump with a pressure meter.

You can then add some salt water to 1, with the valve closed, pump it up to 40PSI. This gives you the hot comprssed air. Pump other side to a vacuum. Then open the valve in between. Swoosh, the comprssed air rishes to the vacuum chamber and the whole thing ends up about 17 PSI or so and close to room temperature.

In one experiment you can test it. My mind test says already this will not work.

__________________
Per Ardua Ad Astra
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#21
In reply to #20

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/16/2006 2:12 AM

Actually you haven't understood the whole and more, you aren't trying to. In the process, first water is evaporated with an enclosed container with the help of a vacuum pump and the vapor produced by this process will be heated by hot, compressed air. Why do I rush the compressed air to the vacuum chamber? The compressed air will enter into the vacuum chamber only through enclosed and never been released inside it.

Register to Reply
Associate
Fans of Old Computers - Commodore 64 - New Member

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chisholm Minnesota USA
Posts: 54
#22
In reply to #21

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/16/2006 4:58 AM

You aren't being quite fair now. People are trying to understand your concept. I've been in your position before and I know others that have been there as well. You have a terrific idea, you've examined every part of it in your head. In your head it works perfectly. In this situation it is very hard to accept criticism from people that could not possibly have spent as much time as you working on this. Especially when they say it won't work and you KNOW it will.

In the interest of better understanding your invention, could you please answer a few questions for me. Really consider them. They may seem like very simple minor problems to overcome and thus were not given much thought.

Once you have a good vacuum in your chamber and the water is vaporizing nicely, how is the vapor moved on to the next stage? Is it simply sucked through the vacuum pump? If not, how would you prevent it? If it leaves through a different exit, how will it flow there since the pressure at its destination will surely be higher than in the vacuum chamber. Assuming that the vapor is allowed to pass through the vacuum pump, what happens immediately once it is on the other side? The pressure here would be atmospheric or even higher since the pump discharges here, right? Now the next step is to heat this area correct? Won't this heating create even higher pressure? I understand that is the point of heating it, but wouldn't this added pressure cause the vapor to immediately condense into a cloudlike fog? Would it then need to reabsorb the latent heat of vaporization?

These questions need to be answered to know how to build your prototype. Once you answer them here to my satisfaction I will help you build a small scale proof of concept if you wish. I will do this for free. It would be compensation enough to know that I had a hand in such a worthwhile project.

Incidently, why do you suppose the machine that a portion of your design is based on is called a OC-OTEC? OC meaning Open Cycle. What you propose would essentially be closed cycle wouldn't it? Do you think all the same principles apply?

slo

I don't think I asked any trick questions.

__________________
Wherever you go... there you are
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#23
In reply to #22

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/16/2006 7:57 AM

Actually the vacuum pump sucks the vapor from the chamber and discharges the vapor into "Boiler" where the vapor will be heated by hot, compressed air. I have take the vaporisation of water with a vacuum pump from OC-OTEC and on the experiment of that, vapor hasn't been condensed. Actually to be condensed again, the latent heat of vaporisation should be extracted out from the vapor. The vapor produced is nearly at the same temp. of outside atmosphere, so the exchange of heat will be very low and condensation (if there is any) will take place very very.... slowly and a very very.... small fraction of vapor will be condensed back. Vapor can't be condensed by just increase in pressure, the latent heat of vaporisation should be taken out. As far as I know, in laboratories, gases (having temp. below their critical temp.) are condensed by applying pressure very slowly so that the compression is isothermal. VAPORS CAN BE CONDENSED BY PRESSURE ONLY WHEN THE PROCESS IS ISOTHERMAL I.E. SLOW. But here the process will be fast and possibility of isothermal compression is nearly about zero. After discharging, the vapor will fall on a one-way road, it is then passed to the Boiler and there it is heated by hot, compressed air. Then the vapor will turn a turbine because there is a condensar at the other end of the turbine. After turning the turbine and producing the electricity, the vapor will come to the condenser and condensed back to water there only. As I have told you that I have taken the process of vaporisation of water from OC-OTEC. It is not an exact copy of OC-OTEC. You can also visit the site at http://www.otecnews.org/articles/vega/07_landbased_OTEC.html, I have gone through the site thoroughly but haven't find example of any kind of condensation of vapor. In that experiment, vapors are discharged into atmospheric pressure. But that differs from my technology in one point that after discharging, the vapor isn't heated further. Actually, to understand the technology better, kindly contact me at my e-mail address of pranabjyoti_calcutta@rediffmail.com. If you are ready to sign an NDA, then I will send you full detail description and sketches, with that you can understand the technology better.

Register to Reply
Associate
Fans of Old Computers - Commodore 64 - New Member

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chisholm Minnesota USA
Posts: 54
#25
In reply to #23

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/16/2006 10:41 PM

Isothermal and adiabatic are opposite processes. Your invention claims to be adiabatic, yet requires rapid heat transfer, in fact faster than isothermal to operate. That is a contradiction. You talk about adiabatic compression being used to transfer heat to the 'boiler'. Well if you transfer the heat, it is NOT adiabatic by definition.

Re: "VAPORS CAN BE CONDENSED BY PRESSURE ONLY WHEN THE PROCESS IS ISOTHERMAL I.E. SLOW" That is simply not true. As long as the temperature is below the boiling point at the prevailing pressure, the gas will condense. You are possibly being confused by gasses with a very low boiling point and thus a critical temperature below room temperature. Water vapor is not one of these. http://www.chem.purdue.edu/gchelp/liquids/critical.html

Lets look at the output of the machine. The turbine. In order for a turbine to operate you need a pressure differential. I assume you intend the condenser to be the low pressure side correct? Unless you use more power to actively cool the condenser, the lowest pressure it can achieve is 1Atm at room temp with 100% efficiency. So to be an effective generator, the other side of the turbine, the high side or boiler must be at a pressure and temperature much higher than atmospheric. But what is your boiler filled with? A rarefied vapor. A partial vacuum with less mass than the same volume of atmosphere. So now you are going to heat it to expand it. What happens when you expand a vacuum? You get a bigger vacuum? How does this turn your turbine?

As I think more of this, it occurs to me that the contents of your 'boiler' while not high pressure, would be very buoyant in air. Perhaps there is a way to extract energy using that property.

You still have not said where the power to drive the compressor comes from. In your mass flow estimate derived from the OC-OTEC was there a volume,temperature and pressure specified? For their purposes it would have been unimportant. For your purposes it is critical.

Some of my points have been slightly exagerated for demonstration purposes.

__________________
Wherever you go... there you are
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#27
In reply to #25

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/17/2006 12:19 PM

You too have done the same mistakes like others. First, I compress the air adiabatically and then use the compressed, hot air to heat up the vapor in the Boiler. The same thing is happening in your home refrigerator. There the freon is first compressed adiabatically and then passed through coils to pass the heat to surrounding air. This happens in my hoem everyday, I am just unable to understand that how the refrigerator transfers its heat to surrounding atmosphere by doing adiabatic compression in the compressor. The process is used in heat pumps for a long time. I have just copied that for a diff. purpose and I AM NOT INTERESTED ABOUT ANY THEORETICAL DEBATE. IT HAPPENS IN REALITY IS JUST ENOUGH FOR ME. IF IN REFRIGERATORS, THE ADIABATICALLY COMPRESSED FREONS CAN TRANSFER ITS HEAT TO SURROUNDING ATMOSPHERE, THEN THE COMPRESSED AIR IN MY PROJECT WILL DO THAT TOO TO THE VAPOR. That may be true, but kindly tell me whether vapor can be condensed without the extraction of latent heat of vaporisation or not. If the compression is adiabatic, then this compression will heat up the vapor and in that case it can not be condensed. No vacuum will turn my turbine, the vapor will. The rarefied vapor will be heated up inside the Boiler by the compressed air. Again, you have missed one point that I have mentioned. The compressed air after giving up its heat, will be released suddenly to cool down the temp. of the condenser. This is a unique process and has never been used before. Initially, a little bit of power will be necessary to kick start the process. After, a part of the electricity produced can be used to run the turbine. Kindly read my last answer to the questions of "Jack of all trades". What kind of graph have you sent to me. Is it isentropic or isenthalpic?

Register to Reply
Associate
Fans of Old Computers - Commodore 64 - New Member

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chisholm Minnesota USA
Posts: 54
#26
In reply to #23

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/16/2006 11:54 PM

The blue dot represents standard temperature and pressure. The red dot represents the vaporization point of water at room temp. Notice it requires a pretty deep vacuum. The red arrow is where you need to be in order to drive a turbine. The straight line connecting red dot and arrow represents the work needed to be done in the boiler. Notice that the whole length of that line lies in the liquid phase. Your only hope is if you can apply large amounts of heat quickly enough to raise the temperature over 100°C while somehow maintaining pressure low enough to remain below the vapor pressure curve. I hope this helps you understand. I owe the base graph to wikipedia.

slo

__________________
Wherever you go... there you are
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#28
In reply to #26

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/19/2006 9:23 PM

Does that mean that vaporisation will only occur at that point. What you have mentioned by the blue point is the boiling point of water at room temp. But I specifically mentioned vaporisation, NOT BOILING. Vaporisation can occur at any point. Actually, the amount of air drawn will be replaced by vaporised water. After a few seconds, only water vapor will be left inside with very little air. This vapor can be easily heated.

As per the OC-OTEC experiment, the vaporisation occurs as 2.76 kPa. PLEASE DON'T MIX BOILING WITH VAPORISATION. VAPORISATION CAN OCCUR AT ANY TEMP. BY VACUUM PUMP. THE RATE OF VAPORISATION DEPENDS ON THE SUCTION CAPACITY OF THE VACUUM PUMP AND THE HEAT TRANSFER SURFACE AREA.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#52
In reply to #12

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/12/2006 11:20 AM

You write "THIS BY ANY WAY, DOESN'T VIOLATE ANY LAW OF THERMODYNAMICS"

Heat Pumps are governed by the 'Reverse Carnot Cycle' absolute temperatures are used, degrees Kelvin. this defines an absolute maximum value, the 'Figure of Merit' will establish a lower C.O.P. heating from 273K to 364K (91C) only a perfect heat pump could achieve a c.o.p. of 3, I read that 'analysis of reversible cycles compared with the Carnot cycle shows that the reverse Carnot cycle has the lowest efficiency of all reverse cycles' check out < http://www.answers.com/topic/coefficient-of-performance > and you will see that your c.o.p. for 300c or 573K is 0.91 now you are not even going to achieve that, because of inefficiencies, 0.5 c.o.p. if lucky.

C.O.P. = Qhot / [Qhot -Qcold] = Thot / [Thot - Tcold] i.e. reverse carnot for cooling.

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Power-User

Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 349
Good Answers: 15
#29

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/25/2006 2:37 PM

Would you please restate you idea in the form of a diagram with clear points of flow and where and what is happening at each point?

Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - HAM Radio - New Member United Kingdom - Big Ben - New Member Fans of Old Computers - Altair 8800 - New Member Canada - Member - New Member

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3576
Good Answers: 95
#30
In reply to #29

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/25/2006 2:55 PM

One might suggest that they use burning nitwits as fuel, they have high calorific value and are easy to trap

__________________
Per Ardua Ad Astra
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#31
In reply to #29

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/26/2006 11:43 AM

Yes,

certainly I can. The flow diagram is not very complex and one can easily understand that. I have still left the idea unprotected. That's why I have to take some protection measures like this now.

Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#32

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

10/26/2006 1:59 PM

From the very beginning subscribers of this thread make mistakes in understanding the technology. As far as I think, none has been able to understand the technology properly, but the real matter of regret is that they are making remarks without proper understanding. Moreover, they began to deny real facts just to make counter arguments of my technology.

First, about Jack of all trades, he just hasn't noticed that I have mentioned a REAL experiment about production of vapor with the help of a vacuum pump. Instead, he expressed doubt about my theoretical knowledge; because the experiment shows a c.o.p of 38000%, though arithmetically that is 77000%. He may still have the doubt, but I am helpless, this is a real experiment, and how amazing the result seems to be, that are REAL. What I know that I can reproduce the whole process as a part of my technology.

Secondly, about Aurizon, he hasn't understood that to heat the nascent vapor produced by vacuum pump, I don't have to rush the compressed air inside the Evaporator, but to flow it through pipe, the compressed, hot air will heat up the vapor by exchanging heat through the walls of the pipes. He also hasn't understood that the compressed, hot air will be used to just heat up the vapor, but instead, he said that this couldn't be true. Why? No answer.

Lastly, about Sloco, he mentioned a thread in support of his denial of the fact that the liquefaction of gases is isothermal process and they are slow. He first started with the words that the vapor produced in low pressure would become liquid again when it is released in normal atmospheric pressure. But forgot that without the extraction of latent heat, vapors cannot be liquefied. I have searched the thread he mentioned in his reply regarding the matter, but was unable to find the time factor for liquefaction of gases. What I have found is critical temp. and critical pressure of some gases, but no mention of the time needed to liquefy them. Later, he sent a graph related to temp. and pressure of water, but forgot that the graph is related to boiling of water and what is occurring here is evaporation of water. To produce energy in a thermal way, we need vapor, how it is produced is immaterial. It may be produced by boiling water or by evaporation of water. But till this day, we think that vaporization and boiling are synonymous, but that's not true. The uniqueness of this technology is the fact that evaporation is the process of production of vapor here instead of boiling.

In a reply, Electroman has questioned that if this technology is true, then why not sponsors are throwing tones of money on me. Why still I have to BEG for just to make a prototype. Probably the reason lies in the psychology of people. The problems this technology can solve are now representing great danger before the existence of mankind. But people just have doubt about the fact that the answers to these huge problems are so simple. The more novel, more exquisite an invention is, the more time it will take by mankind to understand its potential. Now, this technology is standing on a standstill condition, because of this psychology of people "how can the answers to this huge problems are so simple". Despite the fact, if somebody still feel happy to think that this technology hasn't been materialized yet because it isn't true, I don't want to go in argument with him/her. I AM VERY MUCH SANGUINE THAT THIS TECHNOLOGY HAS POTENTIAL AND ONE DAY EVERYBODY WILL UNDERSTAND THAT.

Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - HAM Radio - New Member United Kingdom - Big Ben - New Member Fans of Old Computers - Altair 8800 - New Member Canada - Member - New Member

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3576
Good Answers: 95
#34
In reply to #32

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/07/2006 9:05 PM

Listen you silly twerp, you have a cross section of engineering talent from all over the world who read this and try to understand it. They cannot. What you want to do is make a perpetual motion machine that will violate assorted rules that we all know and love and understand, and that is what we cannot understand.

I suggest you get some education and then you will be able to see the holes in your arguments.

__________________
Per Ardua Ad Astra
Register to Reply
Guru
New Zealand - Member - Kiwi Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Engineering Fields - Power Engineering - New Member Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 6308
Good Answers: 253
#35
In reply to #34

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/07/2006 10:02 PM

And the prize goes to...........Aurizon, for finally snapping and saying what most of us have been thinking.

I would like to thank all the mechanical background engineers for covering the areas that I am not that familar with. I believe I have learnt something, so this was not a total waste of my time.

Pranabjyoti, good luck, when you have finished building your prototype, drop us a line by starting a new thread. I am sure we will all be eager to know what you discover when your theoretical physics meets our reality.

Enough said. Good night everybody.

__________________
jack of all trades
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#38
In reply to #35

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/10/2006 9:01 AM

IF THEORETICAL PHYSICS DOESN'T PUT OBSTACLE ON THE PROCESSES BY WHICH IT IS MADE OF, I AM VERY MUCH SANGUINE THAT IT WOULDN'T CREATE ANY PROBLEM ON THEIR COMBINATION.

Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#36
In reply to #34

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/10/2006 6:59 AM

"A cross section of engineering talent all ove the world", those who makes comments I think supposed to be U.S citizens. If they think that they are the best in the world, that's their thinking, not of the worlds. It is often found that fools think that they live at the top of the world.

I DON'T NEED EDUCATION, WHAT YOU NEED IS THE POWER TO UNDERSTAND AND THINK LOGICALLY. MR. HOLLOW GAS BALLON, CAN YOU TELL ME WHICH ASSORTED RULES THIS TECHNOLOGE VIOLATES. I AM SURE THAT YOU WILL BE UNABLE TO DO SO BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO THINK LOGICALLY AND UNDERSTAND LOGIC. STILL IF YOU THINK THAT YOU ARE OTHERS (I.E UNABLE TO THINK LOGICALLY) ARE THE WORLS BEST ENGINEERS. CONGRATULATIONS FOR MAKING THAT FOOLS PARADISE. BUT FOR THE SAKE OF HUMANITY, KINDLY START YOUR LESSON OF LOGIC AS QUICK AS POSSIBLE.

Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - HAM Radio - New Member United Kingdom - Big Ben - New Member Fans of Old Computers - Altair 8800 - New Member Canada - Member - New Member

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3576
Good Answers: 95
#39
In reply to #36

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/10/2006 9:07 AM

This forum is for people of all countries. Not USA alone.

Your device is not workable. There is no free lunch.

If it had any validity you could make a small working prototype.

Since you cannot make such a prototype, I conclude that you are a mere con game, trying to convince people with money to build your prototype (and give you a free lunch, by the way)

No free lunches here.

__________________
Per Ardua Ad Astra
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#40
In reply to #39

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/10/2006 9:50 AM

If I am con or rip-off artist, I will take other paths like Bearden and others. You will learn about them by joining free_energy@yahoogroups.com or by searching with "free energy". But instead, I have posted my foundings in the website for open discussion. I don't need any free lunch, by indian standard, I am earning enough to continue myself. In my writing, you haven't notice ( because you are blinded by your own hollow pride) that I myself didn't never asked for funding for myself. Instead, I have asked funding for making a prototype. I want to tell you that, I have make a partnership with a U.S based company Batwerx R & D (batwerx@msn.com). I need funding to experimenting with them. I personally wouldn't take a single cent from that.

Even small scale prototypes need a lot of money to make because, to do so, I need expert advise on parts. I am a citizen of a third world country whose per capita income is $500/yr, my personally income is just $200/month. It need about $25000 to make a small scale working prototype. If I am a U.S or any other first world citizen, I now can made reply to you with a small scale working prototype. But this at this stage, is beyond my limit.

I CLEARLY WANT TO ANNOUNCE THAT I DON'T WANT ANY MONEY FOR MYSELF (A FREE LUNCH), ANYONE CAN TEST THAT TECHNOLOGY WITHOUT GIVING ME A CENT BY JUST SIGNING AN NDA. WHAT HE CAN'T IS JUST COMMERCIAL USE OF IT WITHOUT MY PERMISSION.

Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - HAM Radio - New Member United Kingdom - Big Ben - New Member Fans of Old Computers - Altair 8800 - New Member Canada - Member - New Member

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3576
Good Answers: 95
#48
In reply to #40

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/11/2006 7:15 PM

The truth is an NDA is zero protection for you as you lack the funds to enforce the NDA outside of India, which would cost a lot more than the prototype.

I suggest you go to a professor of Mass Heat and Momentum transfer at an engineering college near you and ask him to sign the NDA and examine the drawings.

__________________
Per Ardua Ad Astra
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#50
In reply to #48

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/12/2006 12:31 AM

I have approached a few, but they hadn't got interested in that. Some say that they just don't understand that. The engineering lecturers have said that this is a matter of physics, while at the same the physics lecturers said that this is a matter of engineering. One of my lecturers of physics, who specialised in thermodynamics, once I have approached him. He, without proper investigation, asks me that "don't you think that this goes agains laws of thermodynamics". I then put my own arguments and examaples, he then said that he need some time to think about. After that, I have approached him several times, but he is still "thinking" upto this days.

Once, Neils Bohr's theory of atomic structure was discarded by physicists as "too good to be true". A part of the paper submitted by Satyendranath Bose (Founder of "Bose-Eienstein Statistics" applicable to Bosons, that derived from his name) was discarded by Eienstein himself later proved to be true by experiment of U.S scientists. I DON'T CARE WHETHER A CROOS SECTION OF WORLDS BEST ENGINEERS AND PHYSICISTS WILL DISCARD THIS TECHNOLOGY, WITHOUT PROPER REASON. I WILL STILL CONTINUE MY ARGUMENTS, UNTIL I GOT SUFFICIENTLY STRONG COUNTER ARGUMENT IN REPLY. I STILL HAVEN'T GOT A SINGLE ONE. Just phrases like that, "we are among the world's best physicists and engineers and we say that this technology violates 2nd law of thermodynamics" isn't a strong counter argument for me. I need stronger, based on scientific facts. I know that the data I have collected is true and strong enough to prove the scientific feasibility of this technology.

Register to Reply
Guru
New Zealand - Member - Kiwi Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Engineering Fields - Power Engineering - New Member Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 6308
Good Answers: 253
#53
In reply to #50

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/12/2006 2:15 PM

Where to begin.....Well,

From post #36 "I DON'T NEED EDUCATION, WHAT YOU NEED IS THE POWER TO UNDERSTAND AND THINK LOGICALLY". Hmmm. Education is very important. You cannot have logical thinking if you cannot understand the problems. You cannot understand how the whole system will work if you don't have the knowledge. Understanding comes from education, logical thinking and experience (a triangle of sorts). All three are necessary. I am an electrical engineer working in the power generation and distribution field. I have far more experience in the electrical power generation field than you do (or will likely ever do). Among other things, I design mobile electrical substations, wind farm integration, etc. I have all three of the primary requisits: education (an electrical degree specialising in heavy industrial power generation and distribution (with honours) among other things, experience (many years in this and other electrical fields), and logical thinking. Electrical Engineering is my passion and my life. I follow current developments and research in this and other fields (including free-energy quackery for a laugh). I am one of many, and some of those similar to me are also here, trying to assist you in furthering your understanding.

From post #38 "IF THEORETICAL PHYSICS DOESN'T PUT OBSTACLE ON THE PROCESSES BY WHICH IT IS MADE OF, I AM VERY MUCH SANGUINE THAT IT WOULDN'T CREATE ANY PROBLEM ON THEIR COMBINATION". Very, very wrong. The system will NOT interact as you say it will. Knowledge and experience tell us so. It is your application of this theoretical physics in a system which is wrong, not the physics itself, and it is this which will cause your overall system to fail to produce even 1 watt of energy.

From post #39 "Your device is not workable. There is no free lunch". A western saying (similar to the saying "you cannot have your cake AND eat it too"), meaning (very simply) you cannot get out more than you put in (laws of conservation of energy). Previous posts have tried to hint at (including mine) why we believe that this will NOT work in the way you expect (based on your theoretical physics), or why it will not work at all. This is a practical system, and your lack of understanding of some of the more basic ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING elements of that system (power conversion efficiency, etc), among other things has basically created a system with a ludicrous theoretical efficiency (among other things) bordering on a free-energy system. I am beginning to also have doubts about how you obtained your lab results (which could possibly be one of the causes of why you will think this will work).

Post #50. A lot going on in this post. We are not the worlds best engineers (but thank you for saying that). Could someone here give pranabjyoti a more detailed answer than "it violates 2nd law of thermodynamics, energy conservation, etc". Perhaps you should ask your thermodynamics physics lecturer for a brief explanation on WHY (we and he) says it goes against laws of thermodynamics. Also, don't compare yourself to Neils Bohr, especially after your posts #36 and #38. Just becasue he did it doesn't mean in any way, shape or form that you are right.

Here's another Western saying "Its pointless to flog a dead horse". And stop yelling at us. We are not deaf, it is you that will not listen to education, experience and logical thinking. We are many but we speak as one. We also agree with your thermodynamics physics lecturer. You need to take a really hard look from the beginning of your research and findings with the assistance of a few more people. You have built both on a ground of incorrect assumptions, system oversimplifications, lack of electrical knowledge and incomplete/poor lab work.

We are trying to help. Don't worry about a NDA. You don't have a working system here to protect, only a bunch of tried and true existing systems.

__________________
jack of all trades
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#98
In reply to #53

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/26/2006 11:37 AM

Can you please clarify a bit more what your knowledge and experience says. In your opinion, a theoretical combination of real processes can go against laws of physics. Can you give any example from your 'knowledge and experience'. It would be very kind of you to tell us in more details what your 'knowledge and experience' says. I know well that no free launch is available in nature and my technology doesn't claim so. IT CLEARLY SAYS THAT IT PRODUCES ELECTRICITY BY HARNESSING AMBIENT HEAT OF ATMOSPEHRIC AIR. I just don't understnad from where the question of free launch arises.

What in your saying are 'lab results', aren't done by me. The experiments of 'open-cycle OTEC' was done by Dr. L.A.Vega, about the results of which you are just astonished. If you have doubt about that, why don't you go the page mentioned by me and see the results yourself.

Neils Bohr is an example that often great discoveries are turned down as against science. As for example, Mr. Carnegie had said that he could gather signatures of the chancellors of nearly all univeristies aginst my petition. But if you want to say that Neils Bohr is Neils Bohr and I am I, that's another matter.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#54

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/12/2006 2:54 PM

Hi Pranab, please read as much as you can on heat pumps, as a general rule if the temperature rise is small, the efficiency is high, you simply can't raise temperature 300 degrees with a c.o.p. of 3. you are quite wrong on that count. Read and Learn.

apane juhvati pranam, prane 'panam tathapare, pranapana-gati ruddhva, pranayama-parayana, apare niyataharah, pranan pranesu juhvati, (google it)

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#55
In reply to #54

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/13/2006 12:03 AM

For conventional heat pumps, this isn't possible, but where heat exchange is done inside the Boiler in a counter current process, there it can be possible. What is necessary, is a specially designed Boiler. Counter current is a process, where the fluid that will supply heat and fluid to be heated flows in a reverse direction. In conventional heat exchange, the % of heat exchanged can't be more than 50%. But by counter current, that can cross 80% if the pathway is sufficeintly long and the fluid that comes out at the end will be nearly at the same temp. as that of the heating gas. Kindly google on "counter current" and you will learn about that. Whales, sea lions and other mammals that live in the cold water of the arctic and the antarctic, retain their body heat by this process well.

Even if what you have said, can be taken for granted, but still there are possibilities. If the vapor produced by this way is heated in conventional fashion, then only 1/3rd amount of heat is needed to produce the same amount of electricity in comparison to conventional thermal power plants.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#56
In reply to #55

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/13/2006 12:47 AM

Perhaps you did not google what I wrote,

apane--in the air which acts downward; juhvati--offer; pranam-- the air which acts outward; prane--in the air going outward; apanam--the air going downward; tatha--as also; apare--others; prana--of the airgoing outward; apana--and the air going downward; gati--the movement; ruddhva--checking;.....etc.

If you think you have invented a heat pump that exceeeds Reverse Carnot Cycle Limits, your best place to present your idea, is the Nobel Prize Committee. They will have a bronze statue of you cast and stood at the entrance. The man who turned Science on it's head.

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#57
In reply to #56

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/14/2006 10:55 AM

If you have any idea of heat pump, kindly think this in such fashion. Instead of one sink, there are multiple sinks and the compressed air dumps its heat in the sinks in steps. While studying physics, I have read about multiple engines fitted in rows, the exhaust of one will act as the working fluid of the nest. The conclusion was drawn that, by this process, the ultimate efficiency would depend on the starting temp. of the first and the exhaust temp. of the last. This principle, in reverse, can certainly be applied to heat pumps and that doesn't mean that they exceed reverse Carnot cycle limit.

If I solely invented that thing, I will certainly recommend myself to the nobel committee. But, MOTHER NATURE HAD INVENTED AND APPLIED IT SUCCESSFULLY LONG BEFORE THE EVOLUTION OF MANKIND AND AS FAR AS I KNOW, SHE DOESN'T CARE ABOUT NOBER COMMITTEE AND BRONZE STATUE. BETTER, YOU MAKE A STATUE OF HER AND WORSHIP HER EVERYDAY SO THAT YOU CAN GET SOME GOOD IDEA FROM HER.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#58
In reply to #57

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/14/2006 11:33 AM

Namastee, As a 'professed' Christian, we bow to the 'Godhead situated in the Heart' (this is one translation of my greeting) there is no pressing need for adults to play with dolls. Though that is to be encouraged in the wee bairns. And Adults may, if they so choose, 'set a good example' .... There that's off my chest!..... Multi-Stage heat pumps, seems to be your proposal, Then please then do 'multi-stage' reverse carnot mathematical calculations for your proposed system.

I have posted the formula, It is very simple. Also you say that Nature uses this system to keep Arctic fauna warm. May I submit that most Arctic Fauna have a lot of fat. which they burn to stay warm and also act as insulation? What you describe about breathing has more to do with 'heat exchange' than 'heat pumping' in my opinion. I stand to be corrected, if you can show evidence to the contrary. I repeat the advice I offered earlier, 'The Rule of Ten' ....it is far cheaper to correct mistakes on paper than on the 'Shop Floor'. You will not interest investors untill you provide the minimum, ans you may dissappoint incautious investors, if you fail to do your calculations....Good Luck. (you will lose nothing but ink & paper)

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#59
In reply to #57

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/14/2006 12:22 PM

Postscript:- This is not a forum for discussion of religeous topics, which is why I refrained from mentioning that the sanskrit quote I gave, was from Srimad Bhagavad Gita chapter 4 verse 29. This instruction deals with prana meditation, breath controll.

So I intantly knew where your 'Inspiration' (to coin pun) derived, your name was a giveaway clue as well. It is very relaxing just to sit quietly breathing and may I reccommend that we both meditate on the 'Science' involved. Cold air is in-spired and enters the lungs, moist air with CO2 is ex-pired. As you clearly enjoy Science, may I suggest you obtain some silica gell used to keep things dry. any dessicant would do, Weigh the dessicant dry, count how many breaths you make through a tube dessicsant filter/whatever, and weigh again. Then Show your Professor the results.

Do your calculations, design your own experriment, and offer him your proposed power generation scheme. He might just listen. There may be a scientific reason that our blood temperature is about 100 degrees celsius, and this may impact on your proposition?

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#60
In reply to #59

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/14/2006 12:31 PM

OOPs! 100 degrees Fahrenheit! A Cow's Temperature to please Govinda,Wrong Planet sorry?

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#61
In reply to #60

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/14/2006 11:26 PM

Mr. Carnegie,

The arctic and antarctic fauna don't burn the fat to get warm, this will just act as insulation. If they burn that, that are only for metabolic purpose only. I want to tell you that, but counter current heat exchange, heat can be transfered to the working fluid unevenly, the vapor that will go to the turbine will have a higher temp. than the vapor that will just enter the Boiler. If all the heat, that will be produced will be distributed evenly, then we will get the temp. that is mentioned Carnots calculations. But with counter current uneven heat exchange, this will work in this manner.

You have repeatedly told me to google, why don't you yourself google counter current heat exchange. You can learn that by counter current heating, air conditoners and Condensers and other parts can croos their theoretical limit.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#62
In reply to #61

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/15/2006 6:50 AM

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=5445187&dopt=Abstract

Counter-current heat exchange in the respiratory passages: effect on water and heat balance.

Schmidt-Nielsen K, Hainsworth FR, Murrish DE.

Please provide the peer reviewed data that supports your assertion that "Arctic and antarctic fauna don't burn fat to get(i.e. stay) warm"....This to me is an astonishing statement, staying warm 'IS' a metabolic purpose of metabolisation of food and fat. 'counter-current heat exchange' as I interpret the data, only conserves heat, not create it. or 'pump' heat from a colder source.

Here are three reputable Scientists who may be able to assist you. They appear to have studied the subject in depth.

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#63
In reply to #62

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/15/2006 6:59 AM

Schmidt-Nielsen K, has written a paper entitled "About curiosity and being inquisitive."

Follow in his footsteps, Pranab and you wont go far wrong in my view. Alastair.

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#64
In reply to #63

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/15/2006 11:18 AM

I have never said that counter current pumps heat or produce heat. Not only arctic or antarctic fauna, but all mammals produce heat as byproduct of metabolic activity. What the arctic and antarctic fauna will do is to retain the heat as much as possible. I know and understand the fact very well. I have presented the example of arctic and antarctic fauna to show how efficient counter current is in conserving heat even in the extreme cold of the arctic and antarctic. I am also get stunned by knowing that from my writings, you have understood that I am trying to establish that by counter current, heat can be pumped. In my previous letter, regarding this matter, I have clearly said that by this process, heat can be distributed unevenly to the vapor so that the vapor at the top of Boiler will have a higher temp. that the vapor that his just entering there. I know well that a part of the heat produced by metabolic activities will help to retain the body temp. of mammals, not only arctic and antarctic fauna. What I want to tell that arctic and antarctic fauna don't burn fat to stay warm. What they are specialised is retaining of that heat. I hope that you will understand this well.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#65
In reply to #64

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/15/2006 2:08 PM

Quote:-"Keep the old warehouse intact until the new one is constructed. And build the new warehouse from the materials salvaged by demolishing the old. "

This is am example of 'Reductio ad Absurbum'

A word, Place your projected invention in a closed 'perfectly' i.e. 'ideal' insulated room or enclosure. Your device produces electricity you claim, This energy can leave the room via a cable. By your assertion this room will just get colder and colder. Please inform me at what temperature your proposed device stops working?

Logic is a powerful reasoning tool. lazyness is not doing the preparatory calculations. It is very easy and takes no effort at all to puff oneself up and declare oneself to be all knowing, this is a common 'folly of youth' Compounding this 'error' is returning insults to elders who are offering benevolent good advise. Please be justly proud of your achievements, no sane person can be proud of their 'boasts'. You are seeking knowledge, you have reached a forum of wide experience. Nobody here is impressed by 'secret' claims of 'hidden' explanations. The claims you make are quite extraordinary. not in the least ordinary. You must validate them. PLEASE! Alastair.

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#66
In reply to #65

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/16/2006 11:37 AM

The answer is simple. the plant will stop working when the temp. of the room will go below the freezing point of water. Because then, the water inside the evaporator will freeze as no heat will enter the evaporator from outside. Seawater has a freezing point of -23C, while pure water freezes at 0C. This will depend on what kind of water is used inside the evaporator.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#67
In reply to #66

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/16/2006 12:29 PM

Any evasive answer, that sounds 'clever' Pranab, Please do the mathematics, if you are capable, if not? delegate it to somebody who is.

Gita Chapter 4 Text 29 was Lord Krishna's instructions to those 'sahdus' charged with the responsibility of preserving the vedas by Disciplic Succession. Going up to the Himal mountains and sitting in meditation, prolonged life, much as some animals hybernate. Cold preserves, a low metabolic rate ensures longevity. Those same 'sahdus' after spending say a century in isolated recluse, could return to the 'crazy' world and examine how accurately the 'Holy Scriptures' were being preserved. Correct them if so needed.

The Vedas preserved vital knowledge, vital for the survival of the human species. Mathematics was essential to our survival! Pranabjhoti..... Please DO NOT DISHONOUR YOUR NATION AND YOUR ANCESTORS. by a refusal to examine your proposition under the illuminating light of 'Applied Mathematics' That Sir, is my plea and advice. Best of Luck.

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#73

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/22/2006 2:10 AM

Dear Mr. Pranab Jyoti Ghosh, Prabhu, Namastee.

To your final question, namely can anybody help (I assume 'Finance') you to develop your project.

The answer is 'YES' you are sitting on a Gold Mine.

First you must watch the Film 'The Producers' by Mell Brooks.

When "Springtime for Hitler" the Theme Song is a clue/answer in the London Times Crossword Puzzle, you will know that Professor Ian Fells, His Lady Wife Hazel Fells and Son Alastair have given the O.K. (Hazel sets most of the Times crosswords) Dear Ian is a regular correspondent on Energy Issues for the BBC. (Fells Associates).

A very good friend is Anthony Gordon, who works in the City, is responsible for insuring 'Insurance Companies'. He would likely nominate Dr. David Hooper Phd of London University as referee.

First we have to 'certify' that your scheme has zero chance of success. I think we can guarentee that we could fill pages of signatures from the heads of departments from every university the world over. Confirming that there was no hope whatsoever!

That would give Anthony Gordon the go ahead to reccommend a nominal premium for insuring the 'Insurance Companies' who would bear the 'Risk' if any risk is to be percieved at all.

Then you will need to approach Venture Capitalists who are anctious to 'Lose' money because of an 'Unexpected' windfall from their 'Portfolio' leading to a Tax Burden.

My own Accountant Braham Noble of Wembley can advise on that little problem. (Elton John sacked him for being too expensive by the way, he is a Rabbi, and so he does my accounts for free)

There is no point doing all the paperwork unless we are dealing will millions of dollars.

You will need to form a respectable company, and you will also have to grant full powers of attourney with the running of the said company to the accountant (yet to be nominated). Dire Legal Consequences could arise otherwise! No taint of subterfuge or corruption must be seen or not seen. Everything must be above board and honest with full disclosure.

Forget about 'Power Generation' for the time being, it is far too bold a claim and will not be taken seriously.

Just claim as you have, that you have invented what you 'believe' to be a more efficient way of air conditioning and even refrigeration. (you stated that at 250 Kelvin, 20 degrees below freezing point, brine would still generate electricity????)

There is a simply gigantic industry related to both air conditioning and refrigeration. It is even possible your research will come up trumps, in which case the company shares will be worth a small fortune. That will cause a few problems with the Taxman?

That is my advice. Make millions, by persuasion. The outcome will, as always, be highly educational. The Carnegie Corporation are always in favour of 'Education'

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - HAM Radio - New Member United Kingdom - Big Ben - New Member Fans of Old Computers - Altair 8800 - New Member Canada - Member - New Member

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3576
Good Answers: 95
#74
In reply to #73

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/22/2006 2:22 AM

Mr pranabjyoti, I think Mr Carnegie is actually selling your words for large profits in certain areas.

I suggest you demand a percentage. If he refuses, cut him off without another word...

__________________
Per Ardua Ad Astra
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#75
In reply to #74

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/23/2006 10:39 AM

If he is doing so, he is certainly doing a very good favor for me to be honourary advertising personnel. I wouldn't demand, instead rather will send him some for his contribution to make this idea a reality. I am giving full authority to him to make a script of the "story" that he had told. But with one condition, he should certainly put my arguments on the lips of the character based on me. The spectators, who are fool by nature, may laugh and will make this film a hit, but sensible persons, at least, who respect logic, should think about that seriously and that will be the best public relation that I can imagine for this project. I hope that at the press conference, he would refer that this film is based on true incidents and I am giving him full authority to give the interesting journalists my e-mail address so that they should contact me.

About the project, I will not be convinced until and unless I got the full counter arguments of my arguments, even all the chacellors of the worlds universities and all the scholars of physics signed in the petition that this technology is a perpetual motion machine. I have requested you and other to visit the page that I mentioned previously, at least from there you will understand that there are schloars like Dr. MYron Tribus and Dr. William Worek, who can openly admit their faults and don't hesitate to say that the books should be rewritten. I have searched the net with their e-mail address, but wouldn't be able to get. If I get that, then I am sure that I will be able to reply your mails with their remarks.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#94
In reply to #75

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/25/2006 10:45 AM

Dr William M. Worek Professor & Head, Department Mechanical Industrial Engineering at The University of Illinois Chicago.

If the search engine you are employing could not find such a well respected and vastly published authority, It must be a very 'Bad' search engine. You wrote "I have searched the net......" I submit you have not searched very hard. I would strongly advise that you do not publish these names as being in support of your claims, without first submitting your concept to them, and being in receipt of a response.

You can no longer claim that you have not received a firm offer to advance your project either. You have turned it down. We wonder why? As to signing any documents of non disclosure, The City of London has never worked that way. Yes is yes, no is no. There are plenty of 'Phishers' out there, who with a signature to copy and a valid address, could cause havoc. My RMPTA associations may have influenced that remark. The advise given by 'Jack of all Trades' was exemplary, you only need test each individual section, he gave the analogy of a car. and also directed you to Don Lancaster's blog on 'Patents'. You are persistent Pranab, but also very 'transparent'...You imagine that because you are able to bluff your way about with false claims, I could list them, folk will not take the trouble to check them. I have news for you Pranab. Some folk will. You have reached a forum where engineers exchange views. I am not an engineer, just a 'groupie' but I am an applied mathematician. I have proof read numerous engineering textbooks for mainly 'typo' errors. A lazy undergraduate student could just assume the text was correct, go off and engineer something that might lead to a fatal tragedy. Engineers check, double check, then treble check. then test, double test etc to destruction. I wonder how many Pranab Jhoti 'by golly' Goshs there are listed, This looks familiar>>>

http://www.stirlingengine.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=00007O&topic_id=Power%2dproducing%20Stirling%20engines&topic=4

Dear old Rev.Robert Stirling, I wonder what these folk you have pestered have to say? Have you managed to get more 'Signatures' and Addresses for your collection?

It was a Stirling by the way who foulded Artist's Rifles. Now the Special Air Services, They use criminals as target practice, so remind any criminals you may unfortunately meet to be careful. Take care Pranab and best wishes from The Royal Military Police TA branch. I am chaplain to their Colonel. The Lord High Constable of Scotland, by the way. (The fact that his Brother is named 'Carnegie' had nothing to do with it. The family named me after Prince Alastair, It was all over the Daily Mail this last Thursday)

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#95
In reply to #94

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/26/2006 7:35 AM

I HAVE GOOGLED THE NET WITH THE NAMES OF DR. TRIBUS AND DR. WOREK. I have found of lot of sites but not their e-mail address. Kindly tell me the date of my posting where I have used the names of Dr. Tribus and Dr. Worek in favor of my technology. I have used their names when then I give the example of 'Maisotsenko Cycle', which says that something that apparently violate 2nd law of thermodyanmics is possible certainly. If you have found their e-mail address, then kindly send that to me. I will personally contact them.

Which farm offer to advance my project are you talking about? About the offer of making film! Me and Herb Battel had already formed a company named Batwerx R & D, based on Washington. But further work is at a halt now as we are trying to get grant to start the work. If you can do something, kindly just tell Herb Battell the way to get grant or finance. That will be very helpful for me.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#96
In reply to #95

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/26/2006 9:47 AM

Pranab please read my comment #73 I wrote: -

To your final question, namely can anybody help (I assume 'Finance') you to develop your project.

The answer is 'YES' you are sitting on a Gold Mine.

First you must watch the Film 'The Producers' by Mell Brooks.

Did I mention anything about making a film? I expressed myself in the 'conditional imperative', "FIRST you MUST watch...." Hire this film and 'watch it' You may be asked if you have seen it, and if you respond in the negative, you will be asked "Why not?" The appropriate answer to give would be something like;- "I do not fully understand the English language and misunderstood the instruction"

I presume you understand the Hindi word "Agya" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agya

I am happy to continue this thread in Hindi, Punjabi or Urdu, if that is what you prefer?

As an orphan I was raised by my maternal grandparents. Grandfather's obituary was published on the front page of nearly every Indian Newspaper. I am a bit rusty and would enjoy the practice.

I mentioned #73 Professor Ian Fells, I had a long discussion with him yesterday and he mentioned that he had been asked by the BBC to comment on Po-210 on the World Service Science Program (80 million listeners) Po-210 as you may know is used as a neutron source in PND's and ADMs. We concurred on the wisdom of the Soviet Authorities employing it. with a half life of only 139 days, the 'shelf life' is satisfactorily 'short' His son helped design EARP... Together we initiated http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/news/release?id=121425

Thank you Alistair Fells. & B.N.F.L.plc. Bravo!

Here is an example of a good report.

http://hightech.lbl.gov/documents/DATA_CENTERS/DC_Benchmarking/Data_Center_Facility4.pdf

I suggested Air Conditioning, #73 I wrote:- "....Just claim as you have, that you have invented what you 'believe' to be a more efficient way of air conditioning and even refrigeration." The Enclosed room scenario where you claim your device removes energy all the way down to the freezing point of salt brine. A Calcium Chloride solution would be 'spectacular' by you claims. well cool (NOT by my calculations of the entropy/enthalpy plot that so far you have omitted for an inexplicable reason, against strong advise)

You wrote Post #46 "Though I haven't made graph, but I have energy input and output calculations by myself...." Have you any excuse? other than your initial comment in Post #40?

Lastly I mentioned the Carnegie Corporation's interest in 'Educational Initiatives' Your proposals in my view exemplify nearly every fallacy that I listed in Post #71 especially 'ignorantio elenchi' and also 'equivocation' YES we can help to advance the 'educational' aspects of your project, That is why I wrote, it was immaterial whether it worked or not ('immaterialism' by the way, is discussed here on CR4 on another thread...."The Universe Expanding into What?")

See :- http://www.fallacyfiles.org/equivoqu.html for a funny example

Newspaper headline: "Lack of Brains Hinders Research"

http://www.carnegie.org/

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#97
In reply to #96

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/26/2006 11:22 AM

What kind of educational aspect? I have a strong objection against that if it used as an example of 'perpetual motion machine' type technology. If it is used as a future possibility and if debate can be raised over the scientific and technical feasibility, then it is OK.

I have made that(the energy input and output calculations) and I also send that to you personnally. For what reason, I need an excuse? In my opinion, calculations are stronger than graphs like real life examples are stronger than theoretical calculations. Actually, it is not the (english) language, but lack of expression what do you want to say clearly on your behalf. As for example, you have said that you can help to advance the 'educational aspect', but what kind of educational aspect? Whether using it as another example of 'perpetual motion' or raising question about whether energy can be produced from ambient heat of air or not. You haven't fully expressed what you want to say.

I haven't found any relation to my technology with the film named 'the producers'. In your writing, you have have given a hint for what reason should I see the film. Lastly, my mother tongue is Bengali, I can say and understand Hindi and Urdu, but don't know reading and writing. Punjabi is not my cup of tea on any terms.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#99
In reply to #97

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/26/2006 12:09 PM

Get busy Pranab, opportunity knocks, Here is some useful revision work, if you care to take full advantage, http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/klu/jtan/2001/00000064/00000001/00350647

Abstract:

Zeolite-water heat-pump system is suitable for effective use of low temperature heat sources such as solar energy and waste heats from factories, that is, for energy saving. The heat exchange function of zeolite owes obviously to the nature of the zeolitic water, the state of which can be described in terms of the entropy value as an independent component of H2O. Most entropy values of zeolitic water have been given so far to be intermediate between those of liquid water (69.9 J mol−1 K−1 at 298 K) and ice (41.5 J mol−1 K−1 at 273 K). The present calorimetric measurements proved, however, that the entropy value for Mg-exchanged A-type zeolite is so small, even at the ambient temperature, as to be compared with the residual entropy of ice at 0 K. Check out:- http://www.bza.org/zeolites.html Dr David Hooper researched them for his Masters Degree......He might be a referee if Anthony Gordon nominates him. Re:#73 Antony will certainly ask if you have watched the Film, It will explain how the Carnegie Corporation will not lose any money from the grant. but without the concomitant 'criminal' aspects introduced for comic effect in the film. You wrote :- "I haven't found any relation to my technology with the film named 'the producers'." We are talking about serious money, it needs to be insured. Heaven forbid, but what if you had a nervous breakdown, half way through, the project would come to a standstill.....these things happen in life, or even worse. You may be Examined on your competance to direct this project. I did state "Full Attorney" would be mandatory i.e. the insurace aspect!.....If the mutually agreed accountant said jump, you jump, if he says go there, you go there. etc. A bit Military really. but what else can you expect from someone associated with the RMPTA. http://smirnov.mae.wvu.edu/courses/mae320/notes.html

Wed. Aug. 24: Lecture 1

Sections covered: 1.1 - 1.7

Topics: Surroundings, boundary, closed system, control volume, property, state, process, thermodynamic cycle, extensive property, intensive property, phase, pure substance, equilibrium, specific volume, pressure, temperature, adiabatic process, isothermal process, temperature scales.
Temperature conversion formulae.........

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Anonymous Poster
#159
In reply to #95

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

05/15/2007 10:17 AM

You won't get any response from Myron Tribus because he had a stroke.

I suggest that instead you contact Mythbusters. They'd love to debunk free energy claims. I'm sure they could build your prototype very cheaply.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#160
In reply to #159

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

05/15/2007 11:19 AM

Dear Guest,

Perhaps you know Myron Tribus?

That is sad news, Poor Myron Tribus, I hope he is being well looked after. I never knew him, Dr. Linda Scotson. who works mainly in the paediatric equivalent of stroke, at the University of Bradford, can possibly offer sound advice. Strokes are caused by lack of oxygen to the brain, a great danger at birth. Linda had I know worked with adult stroke patients as well. We are very old friends, so if you contact her on Myron Tribus's behalf, (should you be acquainted with him?) Please pass on my regards.

http://www.aidencox.co.uk/pdf/bradford_report_full.pdf

This other link looks very promising.

http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/stroke/poststrokerehab.htm

As for our Friend Pranab, I am sure with time, he will turn out to be a great Engineer/Scientist. I rather regret taking the mickey out of him, I hope if he reads this, he will accept my sincere apologies.

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#76
In reply to #73

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/23/2006 10:52 AM

It may be called "finance", may be "grant", whatsoever, money is money. Actually, I am searching for money because I am a citizen of third world country, with a very low per capita income and with no infrastructure to assist individual inventors. I have searched the net, but found that there is no Indian "invention promotion" and "invention licensing" company, while first world countries like USA, UK and other are flooded with that. Certainly, some are fraud, but some are real. By searching the net, I now have an idea about the amount necessary to make a prototype and patenting it. That is four to five years of savings to an average citizen of the countries mentioned above, but beyond the total income of my whole life. If I am citizen of any first world country now, I should enter this discussion with the pharase that "I have invented and tested successfully a new environment friendly energy technology that is endless source of energy". But what is fact, is fact. I can and I will answer your posting with a prototype, but lack of sufficient fund deprives me from doing so, irony of fate for me and for the rest of the world.

Register to Reply
Guru
New Zealand - Member - Kiwi Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member Engineering Fields - Power Engineering - New Member Engineering Fields - Electrical Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 6308
Good Answers: 253
#78
In reply to #76

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/23/2006 1:16 PM

Well that's a rather bleak (but understandably accurate) summing up of your situation. Having little hope of success could actually be benificial in your case. If you split your system up into different sections I see no reason why you cannot test each section individually (or in a few parts) to atleast help prove or disprove what your theoretical calculations show. For example, when building a prototype car, you dont have to build the whole thing in one go, you could build and test the engine first, then add the drive train, then a simple rigid chassis to test the wheels, and so on.

Nothing beats a good practical understanding of how a system actually works than by actually building part of that system. You are at the stage where you need to actually get some hands-on experience by building something and testing out your theory and assumptions. It doesn't need to be pretty, or in a prototype production form, or even full size, but it does need to actually prove that one or more of the concepts works.

In your case patenting is bad idea and will almost definitely LOSE you money even if your system works, AND it will not protect your ideas, ESPECIALLY IN YOUR CASE due to your limited funds to fight infringement. Dont waste everything you have worked for up to this point by going down this road. I am a patent holder and my ideas work, the product the ideas are based on works, yet I am under no illusion that I will actually make the money back that was put into patenting the idea.

http://www.tinaja.com/glib/casagpat.pdf (as an example)

__________________
jack of all trades
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#79
In reply to #78

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/23/2006 11:56 PM

Perhaps you forgot, in my first posting I have clearly told that this is a combination of processes that are well tested and now in use in diff. industries and research projects worldwide.

First, the vaporisation of water with a vacuum, it is tested by experiments of open-cycle OTEC and found that to get a vapor flow of 1 kg/sec i.e. 2.31 Mw of energy as latent heat of vaporisation, you need just 3 kw at the vacuump pump.

Next, heating of the vapor produced by the vacuum pump by hot, compressed air coming from compressor, part of a heat pump. The compression ratio of the pump is the same as that of market available heat pumps, those work with a compressor. So their criteria can certainly be applicable to the system and I can expect that with adiabatic compression of the working fluid, in this case air, the temp. can be rose to the that level.

Next, there would be heating of the vapor with the compressed air in counter flow. From the data available from Maisotsenko Cycle, this can be easily derived and can be tested on a simulation.

The rest of the process is a copy of the same thing happening in present day coal based thermal power plants. What extra do I have test in addition to that?.

Actually, the advantage of this technology is that it can be built and tested on a simulation. BUT, EVEN THE COST OF SIMULATION IS BEYOND MY REACH. If the simulation can be built withtin the limit of 1-2K $, it is possible for me (though with hardship and spending a savings of nearly 8 yrs). But beyond that, just impossible for me at this stage.

I have talked with Canadian Scientist Ben Wien, he said that he can take care of prototype making and testing with sum total of $35000 in Canadian funds, that even exceeds the whole life savings of me at this stage.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#81
In reply to #79

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/24/2006 12:22 AM

Dear Pranab,

It is immaterial whether your invention works or does not work as far as 'Venture Capital' is concerned. If the consensus of scholarly opinion is that it wont work, that in no way precludes 'Venture Capital' investment. Underfunding a project is a sure-fire way to guarantee failure. You have so far funded it with the most valuable thing you have to offer......time.....we only live so long! You have reached the door, you have knocked, My Boss is the Butler of Scotland, before I call him, I would like to ensure your message is clearly understood. please allow me to assist. Thank you. Good Luck.

From Goodlock2005 (Incorporated 1980 London)

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#80

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/24/2006 12:12 AM

I am giving below a semi-imaginary experiment, which you may call a perpetual motion machine. But, it is my request to all, kindly try to find and tell me the flaw in the porcess. BUT, DON'T DENY FACTS KINDLY.

I want to discuss about Carnots theorem with some little imaginary addition and alteration to real experiment. In a real experiment of Open-Cycle OTEC by Dr. L.A.Vega, it is found that with a temp. diff. of 20ºC (25ºC and 5ºC) and with a steam flow rate of 26 kg/sec, the gross output is 1838 kW. The energy spent in diff. stages are 334 kW for cold water pumping from a depth of 1000 m, 284 kW for hot water pumping, 80 kW for the compressors i.e. vacuum pumps and 14 kW for pumping desalinated water to the shore. In total, the net output is 1126 kW.

Now, lets keep the whole system intact but just replace the cold water pumping with a heat pump of c.o.p of 3 and an input value of 364 kW and the whole system will delver its heat to raise the temp. of the vapor. Then the output would be 1092 kW of heat and that means 260 kcal of heat and that will raise the temp. of the 26 kg vapor by 10ºC. then this hot vapor will be used to produce electricity and if a 20ºC temp. diff. can produce 1838 kW of electricity then 10ºC temp. diff. can produce 919 kW of electricity I suppose as per Carnots theorem on efficiency of heat engines without going into further complicated details. Then by subtracting all other energy expenditures, we can get a net output of 177 kW of electricity and that is done without using the released cold gas of the heat pump at the condenser for your satisfaction. I am very much sure that if the heat pump will be further used to cool the condenser at the same time, and then we can get at least a temp. diff. of 30ºC and the gross output would be 2757 kW and the net output of 2015 kW of electricity, certainly an improvement over 1126 kW of net output. The more the input in the heat pump, the more will be the net output.

This imaginary experiment clearly shows that even without violating laws of thermodynamics, machines and systems can be built that could extract such heat from atmosphere and convert it into electricity with a positive energy balance. Skeptics please try to clear your point clearly; don't just say this machine violates laws of physics.

Can anybody tell me what is the flaw in the above-mentioned experiment without just by saying that this violates laws of thermodynamics? I want him/her to properly point out the flaw (and very much sanguine that he/she couldn't).

N.B; don't disturb me by asking for T-S, P-V diagram etc. or entropy calculation. If you wish, why don't you do that by yourself. I know, when processes are real, their combination is also real and doesn't violate any law of thermodynamics.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#82
In reply to #80

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/24/2006 12:40 AM

Pranab, It is 'The Complicated Details' which as you write:-"without going into", that are all important. There is a lovely cartoon of a professor chalking up a huge mathematical formula on a blackboard, when asked "What does that symbol 'M' mean, the Professor says "Oh! that, don't worry about 'M', because that is where a 'miracle' occurs."

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#83
In reply to #82

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/24/2006 12:44 AM

Postscript:- 'M' = Enthalpy of Dilution. (following hanging out the laundry to dry.)

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#84

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/24/2006 1:08 AM

yooarehere.com

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#85

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/24/2006 1:23 AM

Tut tut! No Yoo India! Why not? ....."It's too hot, and the air conditioning is a punka walla"....Enthalpy of Dilution

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#86
In reply to #85

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/24/2006 2:42 AM

One last hint Pranab, "If you opened a tin of dry causic soda granules, and failing to read the strong caution printed on the can 'IMPORTANT DANGER READ THIS' and thought to make a dilute solution by pouring water onto the NaOH, why would you be rushed to hospital?"

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#87
In reply to #86

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/24/2006 12:51 PM

I have avoided the complication just to show that even in the crudest of form, it is possible to produce electricity by this process. The "complicated details" phrase are meant for the readers who have no idea of Carnots Theorem. But if I have the faintest of assumption that you will make the meaning of that phrase in such a manner, I will give the "complicated details" which derivation of Carnots theorem of efficiency of a heat engine. I hope that with this letter, you will understand that the 'complicated details' aren't any kind of miracle factor as per your joke. Actually, I have posted this writing before in other blogs, but till this day, I haven't got any real anti-argument to prove that this is impossible, instead some foolish jokes, a old fashioned way of turning down anything which one haven't any proper reply.

In your recent letter, you have mentioned Carnots formulae of c.o.p of heat pump (well known to me) i.e source temp. divided by temp. difference. But, if there are multiple sinks, then what would be the temp. diff. between the sink and the source. The highest minus the source or the lowest minus the source. Both are diff. and give c.o.ps far cry from each other.

In my posting, I have asked to show the flaw in the experiment. Please don't post like that the flaw is factor 'M' i.e. miracle and here it is 'dilution of enthalpy'. Try to point out clearly at what point the process wouldn't work as per it is theoretically predicted.

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#88
In reply to #87

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/24/2006 5:18 PM

Dear Pranab,

Check out:- http://www.phact.org/e/dennis7.html

Quote:-".....Scientific illiteracy is alive and well in Philadelphia! On Sunday, September 15, the Philadelphia Inquirer carried a full page advertisement announcing 'America's Declaration of Energy Independence.' The ad promised a demonstration of a heat system which would generate free electricity from the air, a car engine which would run on water and a number of other counterintuitive devices. While this might or might not be too good to be true it was obviously too good to turn down so I and some fellow skeptics found ourselves amongst the audience of some 3000 in the Core States Center on a Monday night a week later, prepared, to quote the ad, 'to be amazed ... even shocked.' ......

The format was a monolog by one Dennis Lee, former heat pump salesman turned free energy promoter. This was interrupted by demonstrations of the various devices set up across the arena, by tape clips, by effusive praise of neglected inventors, by appeals to patriotism, and by denunciation of the energy utilities, the Federal Government and the Department of Energy who harrass selfless innovators......

Just Google for "Heat Pump Fallacies" or "Heat Pump Perpetual Motion" and all the information you require will be in front of your eyes Pranab.

Check Wikipedia for 'Rankine Cycle' and look at the graph.

Then check The John H. Glen Research centre for some genuine science.

http://www.nasatech.com/Briefs/Sept00/LEW16834.html

Read the book 'Voodoo Science'... physicist Robert Park's witty and entertaining account of his battles with baloney and bogus science. and especially the Dry Comments by Senator John H. Glen, made to a rather foolish gentleman who kept on insisting there was an issue worth 'Debating' You claim to have a physics qualification, from where? Pranab. when? Sorry to distrust your claim. I would like to see some evidence that I can check.

'Enthalpy of Dilution' with efficient 'Cross Flow' heat exchange, might at a pinch make your crazy system work. but you seem to ignore the 'hint' You seem to want 'Prestige' or as I am beginning to suspect 'Money' off some gullible fool. I have shown you where you could obtain sufficient funds to forward your project. but Big Money would bring Big Experts.....Are you frightened of those Pranab?.... are you just after the small fish? ones too poor to see you arrested and put in jail? It is rather disconcerting seeing 'PARANA' keep appearing on the CR4 'spell check' for your name.

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Commentator

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 80
#89
In reply to #88

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/24/2006 9:18 PM

I got my degree of physics from the University of Calcutta in 1992, the more than century old university, which give birth to M.N.Saha (Gas-ionisation Theory), Satyendranath Bose (Bose-Eienstein Statistics) and other eminent physicists, economists, historians and other scholars. You may check what I have said at their website or e-mail the register, though that is in my opinion just wastage of time, but your time is yours and what to do with that is upto you.

I know the names of Dennis Lee, Tom Bearden and others like them and with that I also know some new technology called HAARP, you may search the net with that phrase and will come to know a new technology the operating procedure of which have a good similarity with mine.

I NOW WANT TO CLEARLY ANNOUNCE THAT ANYONE, WHO IS INTERESTED CAN TEST MY TECHNOLOGY WITHOUT GIVING ME A SINGLE CENT. WHAT HE/SHE HAVEN'T THE RIGHT IS TO PATENT OR DISCLOSE THE TECHNOLOGY TO OTHERS WITHOUT MY CONSENT. IT IS SIMPLE, YOU CAN GET THE WHOLE DATA BY JUST SIGNING AN N.D.A. NOTHING MORE IS NECESSARY.

Mr. Carnegie, I have repeatedly announced that if I am the Dennis Lee, Tom Bearden kind of "inventor", I would have take another path rather than debating with you in cr4. The amount necessary may not be large, but not too small to just giving me without any kind of thinking. Usually, what is proposed is both (me and the financer) would form a small company and the company will test and apply for patent. The question of gaining, on my behalf will start with the first licensing agreement. You may ask that to Herb Battell (batwerx@msn.com) that whether I have ever demanded any money from him or not.

Register to Reply
Guru
Hobbies - HAM Radio - New Member United Kingdom - Big Ben - New Member Fans of Old Computers - Altair 8800 - New Member Canada - Member - New Member

Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3576
Good Answers: 95
#90
In reply to #89

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

11/24/2006 9:27 PM

There is a way to make it work. You need trained molecules that will follow detailed instructions from Max (The Maxwell Demon) and that would indeed work very well....

__________________
Per Ardua Ad Astra
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 847
#130
In reply to #90

Re: Air as a Source of Energy

12/03/2006 7:26 PM

aurizon: You are a GENIUS, no doubt about it aurizon!...... Now we know from looking down a kid's plastic toy microscope at talc suspended on a drop of water, that Brownian Motion is rather hectic and chaotic. So chances are, we will never train those molecules. even Maxwell and all his Demons, However 'Van de Waals' forces aside, Gas also exhibits Brownian Motion.....and....now that 'Nano-Fabrication' Technology is with us, perhaps we might miniaturize those 'just-three-shakes-charge-the-capacitor' and give a minutes worth of illumination 'shake torches'? Micron dimensions are now standard, those air/gas molecules? could we just happen to persuade a micro-magnet suspended in a coil? to 'shake up' a bit of electrical energy?......Well worth a 'Pipe Dream' in my view. 'Peer Review' is the only show in town they say.

__________________
"Neither man nor woman can be worth anything until they have discovered that they are fools. The sooner the discovery is made the better, as there is more time and power for taking advantage of it." William Lamb
Register to Reply
Register to Reply Page 1 of 2: « First 1 2 Next > Last »
Interested in this topic? By joining CR4 you can "subscribe" to
this discussion and receive notification when new comments are added.

Comments rated to be "almost" Good Answers:

Check out these comments that don't yet have enough votes to be "official" good answers and, if you agree with them, rate them!
Copy to Clipboard

Users who posted comments:

Alastair Carnegie (66); Anonymous Poster (4); aurizon (27); Electroman (2); illiccud (1); jack of all trades (9); powerprakaash (1); pranabjyoti (51); seaplaneguy (1); sloco (3)

Previous in Forum: Nanotech Liquids Quickly Stop Bleeding   Next in Forum: Using the Brain to Control Video Games
You might be interested in: Vapor Barriers and Retarders, Air Hose and Air Duct Hose, Air Velocity Flow Sensors