Remember me
▼ Content

Gravity fed electrical generation system



Page 15 of 16<<<13141516>
21-07-2022 08:24
James_
★★★★☆
(1047)
Into the Night wrote:
dehammer wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:Snip
Don't bother responding, I can see no one is interested in a real scientific discussion. I will no longer be following this since all I get is insults.

Denying science isn't a real science discussion. You really should study some theories of science, especially the ones you ignore, such as the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and Kirchoff's law.


Into the Night wrote:
Kirchoff's law


gesundheit!
22-07-2022 16:23
dehammer
★★★☆☆
(480)
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
dehammer wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:Snip
Don't bother responding, I can see no one is interested in a real scientific discussion. I will no longer be following this since all I get is insults.

Denying science isn't a real science discussion. You really should study some theories of science, especially the ones you ignore, such as the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and Kirchoff's law.


Into the Night wrote:
Kirchoff's law


gesundheit!
Seriously? We are talking about water and he uses a law about electricity as a shield against having to think about it? That is what you call a discussion of science?
22-07-2022 18:19
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12231)
dehammer wrote:Seriously? We are talking about water and he uses a law about electricity as a shield against having to think about it?

Seriously? You were supposedly talking about electricity generation and you are now once again using your rapid-design-pivot to create a new water-focused version to force the discussion towards "water" as a shield against having to consider what he said.

The cacophony of vocal support for your "system" is deafening in its silence. I was going to ask you on what sites you have received any sort of financial support ... but nobody is going to fund a system that avoids definition just to hide the fact that its design violates physics.

.
22-07-2022 21:06
James_
★★★★☆
(1047)
IBdaMann wrote:
dehammer wrote:Seriously? We are talking about water and he uses a law about electricity as a shield against having to think about it?

Seriously? You were supposedly talking about electricity generation and you are now once again using your rapid-design-pivot to create a new water-focused version to force the discussion towards "water" as a shield against having to consider what he said.

The cacophony of vocal support for your "system" is deafening in its silence. I was going to ask you on what sites you have received any sort of financial support ... but nobody is going to fund a system that avoids definition just to hide the fact that its design violates physics.

.



Ka....ka...karchüff......

If you have a single wave that is 10 milliamps and has a sine wave function of 1.2 Hz then when it is split in 2 energy will be lost. Work requires energy. This might be one reason why microprocessors (computer chips) get so hot.
This need for cooling shows entropy. Now if you get into quantum tunneling or super conducting where there is no entropy such as a mag-lev train then we're discussing something else. Of course I think mag-lev uses nitrogen to super cool its magnets and then that's about 2º C. ABOVE absolute 0.
Edited on 22-07-2022 21:07
23-07-2022 00:20
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12231)
James_ wrote:If you have a single wave that is 10 milliamps and has a sine wave function of 1.2 Hz then when it is split in 2 energy will be lost.


The 1st law of thermodynamics states that energy is never destroyed into nothing. If you "split" a 10-milliamp 1.2Hz wave of electrical current (whatever you mean by "split"), there is still the same amount of energy.

Electrical current requires matter as a medium and therefore suffers losses from resistance, which converts the electrical energy into thermal energy, along with other impedances to the electrons' flow.

Electromagnetic waves in a vacuum do not suffer losses from resistance but they diminish per the inverse square law as they dissipate.

James_ wrote:Work requires energy.

Of course. This is why work is treated as energy and is measured in energy units.

James_ wrote:This might be one reason why microprocessors (computer chips) get so hot.

Microprocessors get so hot because of two factors:

1. Resistance cannot be totally eliminated, and resistance converts electrical energy into thermal energy, and

2. Microprocessors operate at extremely high frequencies, thus performing a great deal of work through the logic gates. More work in the same amount of time means greater power consumption ... and more work of course means more energy used.

James_ wrote: This need for cooling shows entropy.

Correct. Yes, it does. It shows that work is being performed and some amount of otherwise usable energy has been converted into unusable thermal energy.
23-07-2022 00:40
dehammer
★★★☆☆
(480)
IBdaMann wrote:
dehammer wrote:Seriously? We are talking about water and he uses a law about electricity as a shield against having to think about it?

Seriously? You were supposedly talking about electricity generation and you are now once again using your rapid-design-pivot to create a new water-focused version to force the discussion towards "water" as a shield against having to consider what he said.

The cacophony of vocal support for your "system" is deafening in its silence. I was going to ask you on what sites you have received any sort of financial support ... but nobody is going to fund a system that avoids definition just to hide the fact that its design violates physics.

.
Once again, you prove you are nothing but insults. Go ahead and gloat. Since you can not defeat an argument with actual scientific information, all you can do is insult and run people off with your gross behavior.
23-07-2022 01:13
James_
★★★★☆
(1047)
IBdaMann wrote:
James_ wrote:If you have a single wave that is 10 milliamps and has a sine wave function of 1.2 Hz then when it is split in 2 energy will be lost.


The 1st law of thermodynamics states that energy is never destroyed into nothing. If you "split" a 10-milliamp 1.2Hz wave of electrical current (whatever you mean by "split"), there is still the same amount of energy.

Electrical current requires matter as a medium and therefore suffers losses from resistance, which converts the electrical energy into thermal energy, along with other impedances to the electrons' flow.

Electromagnetic waves in a vacuum do not suffer losses from resistance but they diminish per the inverse square law as they dissipate.

James_ wrote:Work requires energy.

Of course. This is why work is treated as energy and is measured in energy units.

James_ wrote:This might be one reason why microprocessors (computer chips) get so hot.

Microprocessors get so hot because of two factors:

1. Resistance cannot be totally eliminated, and resistance converts electrical energy into thermal energy, and

2. Microprocessors operate at extremely high frequencies, thus performing a great deal of work through the logic gates. More work in the same amount of time means greater power consumption ... and more work of course means more energy used.

James_ wrote: This need for cooling shows entropy.

Correct. Yes, it does. It shows that work is being performed and some amount of otherwise usable energy has been converted into unusable thermal energy.



The 1st law of thermodynamics states that energy is never destroyed into nothing. If you "split" a 10-milliamp 1.2Hz wave of electrical current (whatever you mean by "split"), there is still the same amount of energy.


You "Butties" need your own life. When you and dehammer say "hammered", get a grip on your friend and not me, okay?
23-07-2022 01:14
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12231)
dehammer wrote:Once again, you prove you are nothing but insults.

Mockery. The correct word is "mockery."



Until you take me up on my offer to build a system diagram of your idea, which on the surface appears to be an obvious and egregious violation of physics, no actual discussion is possible, especially while you are intentionally using the lack of any formal design to constantly pivot to avoid valid criticisms.

dehammer wrote: Go ahead and gloat.

Mock. The correct word is "mock." You want me to go ahead and mock.

Sure. I can do that.



You change your "design" with such a high frequency that Tom's Hardware is starting to establish benchmarks and to compare you against other processors in your category.

Your "design" is so egregious that the special task force that enforces the laws of thermodynamics has issued an APB on your idea.

You tried to crowd-source your contraption and single-handedly shut down the internet by convincing everybody around the world to simultaneously log-off. Now your idea is categorized as a denial of service attack.

Just let me know when you want more, ... or when something changes and you'd like to commit to one design idea and to put "pen to paper."

dehammer wrote: Since you can not defeat an argument

Nobody can defeat your argument ... since you have already forfeited.

dehammer wrote: ... with actual scientific information to which I will listen

You are the only one who can fix that. You're on your own.

dehammer wrote:, all you can do is insult and run people off with your gross behavior.

Wow, I didn't realize I had that kind of power to mentally control people. Let me put that mind-control to use right now:

Make a formal UML specification of your idea. I order it.

.
23-07-2022 02:50
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18983)
James_ wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
dehammer wrote:Seriously? We are talking about water and he uses a law about electricity as a shield against having to think about it?

Seriously? You were supposedly talking about electricity generation and you are now once again using your rapid-design-pivot to create a new water-focused version to force the discussion towards "water" as a shield against having to consider what he said.

The cacophony of vocal support for your "system" is deafening in its silence. I was going to ask you on what sites you have received any sort of financial support ... but nobody is going to fund a system that avoids definition just to hide the fact that its design violates physics.

.



Ka....ka...karchüff......

If you have a single wave that is 10 milliamps

Unit error. Waves are not measured in amperes.
James_ wrote:
and has a sine wave function of 1.2 Hz
then when it is split in 2 energy will be lost.

What do you mean by 'split in 2'? What are you splitting?
James_ wrote:
Work requires energy. This might be one reason why microprocessors (computer chips) get so hot.

Most computer chips are not microprocessors.
Not all microprocessors get very hot.

Large microprocessors such as the Intel and AMD chips typically found in PCs get hot because of their high clock speeds, forcing the amount of time switching gates in the processor spend in linear mode to increase.

James_ wrote:
This need for cooling shows entropy.

Reversal fallacy. The 2nd law defines the concept of heat, not the other way around.
James_ wrote:
Now if you get into quantum tunneling or super conducting where there is no entropy such as a mag-lev train then we're discussing something else.

Mag lev trains have increase entropy AND conform to the 2nd law of thermodynamics just like anything else.
James_ wrote:
Of course I think mag-lev uses nitrogen to super cool its magnets and then that's about 2º C. ABOVE absolute 0.

Liquid nitrogen boils at 77 deg K. The Centigrade scale is not referenced to 0 deg K.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
23-07-2022 02:51
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18983)
dehammer wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
dehammer wrote:Seriously? We are talking about water and he uses a law about electricity as a shield against having to think about it?

Seriously? You were supposedly talking about electricity generation and you are now once again using your rapid-design-pivot to create a new water-focused version to force the discussion towards "water" as a shield against having to consider what he said.

The cacophony of vocal support for your "system" is deafening in its silence. I was going to ask you on what sites you have received any sort of financial support ... but nobody is going to fund a system that avoids definition just to hide the fact that its design violates physics.

.
Once again, you prove you are nothing but insults. Go ahead and gloat. Since you can not defeat an argument with actual scientific information, all you can do is insult and run people off with your gross behavior.


LIF. You are describing yourself again. You can't project YOUR problems on anybody else, dude.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
23-07-2022 08:40
James_
★★★★☆
(1047)
Into the Night wrote:

Liquid nitrogen boils at 77 deg K. The Centigrade scale is not referenced to 0 deg K.



And next like dehammer you'll say perpetual motion isn't possible. Water melting is the inverse of absolute 0º k (kelvin). That is why it's 0º C.
−273.15 °C is 0º k. And 0º C. is 273.15º C. Are you aware that when they say it's
59º F (15º C) they're actually saying it's 288.15º k (486.67º F)?
Is that hot or? Am curious, are you and dehammer related? You guys remind me of
The Waterboy.
23-07-2022 19:50
dehammer
★★★☆☆
(480)
IBdaMann wrote:snip.
Unlike you, I actually understand what the science is. I did some research and found that, yes it could work in theory, but the necessary height would be nearly 2 MILLION feet. Obviously, there is no place on earth it would work.

IF we can ever get the efficiency of the fuel cell + electrolysis of hydrogen below 1% loss (i.e. 99+% efficient) this would work. At our current level of technology, it does not.

That is the difference between you and me. I do understand what I am talking about. You throw out phrases and such and think that it never work, just as those that said we would never fly, or that a carriage without a horse would never move. People like you do your best to block science, while people like me try to advance it.

There is a saying I heard as a child.
Small minds look at a problem and look to the sky and say "why me?"
Average minds look at a problem and then the sky, and say "why?"
Smart minds look at a problem, look to the sky, rub their jaws and say "why not?"

Maybe, one day, if you work at it, you can advance to the point you are saying "why". I will not hold my breath.
23-07-2022 22:21
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12231)
dehammer wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:snip.
Unlike you, I actually understand what the science is.

Nope. You are a scientifically illiterate moron who doesn't even know what science is. You are running scared from me because you fear that the science I offer will burst your fragile fantasy.

Frankly, you should ditch that stupid fantasy and try to actually contribute to the world in some value-added way. As it stands, your endless chain of pivots, in protection of your fantasy, consumes all of your effort.

dehammer wrote: I did some research and found that, yes it could work in theory,

Nope, there is no science theory which supports a working perpetual motion machine. You did not perform adequate research. In fact, you obviously avoided research in any area of thermodynamics. You confined your efforts to material that supported your desperate, predetermined conclusion ... which necessarily required you to avoid science at all costs. Your need to reach for the subjunctive, i.e. "could work," shows that you are fully aware that it does not work.

No amount of research will enable you to violate the laws of thermodynamics. Your "it" cannot work. You know this but this awareness is too painful for you to accept . You are desperate to "unlearn" what you know, in the hopes that the pain will go away. This is the real reason you don't dare create a formal diagram and commit to just one version of design.

dehammer wrote: but the necessary height would be nearly 2 MILLION feet.

Weren't you informed back in 2013 that the height doesn't matter? Besides, the height of the totally undefined and unspecified can never matter.

dehammer wrote:Obviously, there is no place on earth it would work.

... nor is there any place in the universe it would work.

dehammer wrote:IF we can ever get the efficiency of the fuel cell + electrolysis of hydrogen below 1% loss (i.e. 99+% efficient) this would work.

Nope. You can never generate enough energy to keep the turbines running in perpetuity, much less have any surplus energy to help save the world.

Thermodynamics. You can't circumvent science. I see you employed the Marxist "we" in order to attempt to offload your problem onto humanity. You can't. It's your problem and you own it.

dehammer wrote:That is the difference between you and me. I do understand what I am talking about.

I will grant that you understand your desperation and your fantasy delusion while I understand the science. I promise to keep the science to myself and to not allow it to threaten your fantasy if you'll keep your fantasy to yourself and not obligate a discussion of the science.

dehammer wrote:You throw out phrases and such

Collectively it is called "science." It's very dangerous ... to fantasy delusions.

dehammer wrote: ... just as those that said we would never fly, or that a carriage without a horse would never move.

Those were different people who were naysaying different topics. You are arguing that because there were errant naysayers in the past, anything that you concoct today must necessarily work and be free from criticism, even a perpetual motion machine that violates thermodynamics.

You suck at logic, by the way.

dehammer wrote: People like you do your best to block science, while people like me try to advance it.

Once again you demonstrate that you don't even know what science is.

As a reminder, I am the one who is pointing to science that says you have a fatal problem. You are the one who is intentionally ignoring the science that says you have a fatal problem in the hope that simply ignoring science will make the fatal problem go away.

That makes you an idiot. I bet this is why you are also ignoring the total absence of people willing to bankroll your fantasy. That can only mean that nobody on the planet with investment capital believes that your fantasy is viable. What do they know that you are desperate to deny?

dehammer wrote:Small minds look at a problem and look to the sky and say "why me?"

Are you talking about your "disabled" status?

dehammer wrote:Average minds look at a problem and then the sky, and say "why?"

Are you talking about your need to research thermodynamics?

dehammer wrote:Smart minds look at a problem, look to the sky, rub their jaws and say "why not?"

... and when those smart people discover the reason why not, they don't proceed to delude themselves, do they? Self-delusion is for stupid people.

I notice that you have opted to not take me up on my offer, and that you have instead steered clear of committing to any one single version of your "idea." All we have in your case is you broadcasting "Look at me, look at me ... everybody look at me. I am stupid and in desperate need of attention so pay attention to me!" You have become proficient at pivoting quickly just as you are being cornered by someone pointing out a flaw in your design of the moment. You snatch your delusion from the jaws of defeat to allow it to live and delude another day.

If you keep it to yourself, your delusion will meet with far less danger.

.
24-07-2022 21:55
James_
★★★★☆
(1047)
Not to feed dehammer's delusion but when hydrogen fuel cell research can have its own dedicated source of green energy, it will be difficult to say anything one way or the other. This only shows why research matters. If my Bessler build works, then strangely enough people who support perpetual motion constantly attacked me.
The argument is a play of words by scientists. Gravity (the Earth's as an example) is the only known source of perpetual energy. And this gets a great deal into history (Bessler, Newton and Einstein, etc.) that somehow people don't understand it.
An example is that I'll be able to cite NASA scientists while saying what they're discussing has already been done. This is what I'm talking about.

"We're predicting that if you get out far enough in the solar system, you actually have the opportunity to start measuring the dark matter force," said Jim Green, study co-author and advisor to NASA's Office of the Chief Scientist. "This is the first idea of how to do it and where we would do it."
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/how-dark-matter-could-be-measured-in-the-solar-system


And what was done;
Einstein became world famous on 7 November 1919, following press publication of a meeting held in London on 6 November 1919 where the results were announced of two British expeditions led by Eddington, Dyson and Davidson to measure how much background starlight is bent as it passes the Sun.
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsnr.2020.0040


How do scientists not know this? IMHO it is why astronomers say dark matter/energy.
And today photons (light) is given mass when in 1915/1919 light was considered to have no mass because mass is dependent on "rest mass". Just basic science.
Yet with Planck's work E = hv, its frequency and energy is relative to light having mass. Just a basic principle of physics.

p.s., rest mass is either something sitting on a scale or an element in a mass spectrometer. Basically how does matter (an element) have it's path in a magnetic field changed? Basically how much energy in a magnetic field does it take to control the path of an element.
This is basically what has led to ITER. https://www.iter.org/
And they're trying to create a fusion reaction like the Sun has. What they're working on in France has so far cost over $10 Billion. And yet I am cursed for spending $20,000 on a perpetual motion machine in a perpetual motion forum.
Now if only this stuff was made up.

Edited on 24-07-2022 22:32
24-07-2022 23:58
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12231)
James_ quoted:"We're predicting that if you get out far enough in the solar system, you actually have the opportunity to start measuring the dark matter force,"

Why should any rational adult believe in the existence of "dark matter"?

Don't you get suspicious at the implication that you need to be away from planet earth to be able to observe/measure it?

James_ quoted:p.s., rest mass is either something sitting on a scale or an element in a mass spectrometer.

The problem lies with morons who insist that photons must have a rest mass, when they know that photons only exist at the speed of light.

James_ quoted: This is basically what has led to ITER. And they're trying to create a fusion reaction like the Sun has. What they're working on in France has so far cost over $10 Billion.

In the case of ITER, politics prevents any meaningful progress because all want ownership of the final valuable product, and hence they just will never be able to agree. If there were no such prize of incalculable value at the end of that rainbow, like the ISS, they'd be able to agree and get it made.

James_ quoted: And yet I am cursed for spending $20,000 on a perpetual motion machine in a perpetual motion forum.

You spent $20,000 on your Bessler wheel?

Wouldn't you have preferred an entire home theater instead ... for half the price?

25-07-2022 00:18
dehammer
★★★☆☆
(480)
IBdaMann wrote:
... and when those smart people discover the reason why not, they don't proceed to delude themselves, do they?
.
The reason smart people say "why not" is they look for solution instead of simply saying that everything is a failure before trying. Small minded people believe everything will fail and will throw out words like "second law of thermodynamics" as if they have a clue what it means.

Have fun with the small mind never learning or find a way to improve things. You have obviously reached the pentacle of your success on the day you were born.
25-07-2022 00:25
James_
★★★★☆
(1047)
IBdaMann wrote:
James_ quoted:"We're predicting that if you get out far enough in the solar system, you actually have the opportunity to start measuring the dark matter force,"

Why should any rational adult believe in the existence of "dark matter"?

Don't you get suspicious at the implication that you need to be away from planet earth to be able to observe/measure it?

James_ quoted:p.s., rest mass is either something sitting on a scale or an element in a mass spectrometer.

The problem lies with morons who insist that photons must have a rest mass, when they know that photons only exist at the speed of light.

James_ quoted: This is basically what has led to ITER. And they're trying to create a fusion reaction like the Sun has. What they're working on in France has so far cost over $10 Billion.

In the case of ITER, politics prevents any meaningful progress because all want ownership of the final valuable product, and hence they just will never be able to agree. If there were no such prize of incalculable value at the end of that rainbow, like the ISS, they'd be able to agree and get it made.

James_ quoted: And yet I am cursed for spending $20,000 on a perpetual motion machine in a perpetual motion forum.

You spent $20,000 on your Bessler wheel?

Wouldn't you have preferred an entire home theater instead ... for half the price?




Much of what you said is right. Bessler's Wheel can help me to immigrate to Australia. A home entertainment system which would be nice wouldn't be able to help me with that.
Besides, if I had that nice home entertainment system then I might miss the pleasure of your most enjoyable company. I mean I get to post with you! What is that worth?

p.s., I have been known to watch DS9.

Edited on 25-07-2022 00:43
25-07-2022 00:51
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12231)
dehammer wrote:The reason smart people say "why not" is they look for solution instead of simply saying that everything is a failure before trying.

Only marginally correct. Smart people utilize the scientific method to eliminate non-solutions. Stupid people instead cling to their preferred non-solution.

You are relegated to clinging to your preferred non-solution because you are a scientifically illiterate moron who cannot distinguish the scientific method from a can of Pringles potato chips. This is why the "design" of your non-solution is so fluid and why it can be changed more often and more quickly than my daughter changes her clothes, i.e. because details simply don't matter in any non-solution.

dehammer wrote:Small minded people believe everything will fail

Small-minded people have to misrepresent the positions of others in order to better cling to their preferred non-solutions.

dehammer wrote:Have fun with the small mind never learning or find a way to improve things.

Have fun clinging to your non-solution and never adding value in any way.

dehammer wrote:You have obviously reached the pentacle of your success on the day you were born.

I was going to recommend you learn the words "pinnacle" and "pentacle" ... but that would require you to stop obsessing over your non-solution for a while, which I realize would be a short while too long ... so nevermind.
25-07-2022 01:56
James_
★★★★☆
(1047)
IBdaMann wrote:


You are relegated to clinging to your preferred non-solution because you are a scientifically illiterate moron who cannot distinguish the scientific method from a can of Pringles potato chips.



Insulting Pringles potato chips, really? Next it'll be the Ford Pinto. Where will your lunacy end?
25-07-2022 04:01
James_
★★★★☆
(1047)
IBdaMann wrote:
dehammer wrote:The reason smart people say "why not" is they look for solution instead of simply saying that everything is a failure before trying.

Only marginally correct. Smart people utilize the scientific method to eliminate non-solutions. Stupid people instead cling to their preferred non-solution.

You are relegated to clinging to your preferred non-solution because you are a scientifically illiterate moron who cannot distinguish the scientific method from a can of Pringles potato chips. This is why the "design" of your non-solution is so fluid and why it can be changed more often and more quickly than my daughter changes her clothes, i.e. because details simply don't matter in any non-solution.

dehammer wrote:Small minded people believe everything will fail

Small-minded people have to misrepresent the positions of others in order to better cling to their preferred non-solutions.

dehammer wrote:Have fun with the small mind never learning or find a way to improve things.

Have fun clinging to your non-solution and never adding value in any way.

dehammer wrote:You have obviously reached the pentacle of your success on the day you were born.

I was going to recommend you learn the words "pinnacle" and "pentacle" ... but that would require you to stop obsessing over your non-solution for a while, which I realize would be a short while too long ... so nevermind.



Please don't tell me that Pintos caught fire when rear ended. That and their single over head cam had a lubrication problem so they didn't last any longer than a Yugo.
And now we know that gasoline powered automobiles are unsafe at any speed. A historical reference to the Corvair and why they were unsafe. They used gasoline engines like the Ford Pinto.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mqu-gRqt3g
To please Swan we need to ban all petrol products. Petrol is flammable so should not be used. Fortunately we have his wisdom to guide us.
25-07-2022 04:01
James_
★★★★☆
(1047)
And now we know that gasoline powered automobiles are unsafe at any speed. A historical reference to the Corvair and why they were unsafe. They used gasoline engines like the Ford Pinto.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mqu-gRqt3g
To please Swan we need to ban all petrol products. Petrol is flammable so should not be used. Fortunately we have his wisdom to guide us.
Edited on 25-07-2022 04:02
25-07-2022 04:01
James_
★★★★☆
(1047)
And now we know that gasoline powered automobiles are unsafe at any speed. A historical reference to the Corvair and why they were unsafe. They used gasoline engines like the Ford Pinto.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mqu-gRqt3g
To please Swan we need to ban all petrol products. Petrol is flammable so should not be used. Fortunately we have his wisdom to guide us.
Edited on 25-07-2022 04:02
25-07-2022 06:42
duncan61
★★★★☆
(1911)
DeHammer.Hydrogen cars work here in Perth as the plant in Kewdale can fill cars. The benefit is they are clean. Construction has begun on putting solar panels on Perth airport.100% of the materials are sourced from W.A. Kewdale is in the area that the panels will supply electricity. Hydro electric works by water volume passing and generating electricity.Are you suggesting using some of that electricity to create hydrogen and then powering fuel cells with the hydrogen.What is the return on the fuel cell?
25-07-2022 08:06
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12231)
duncan61 wrote:
DeHammer.Hydrogen cars work here in Perth as the plant in Kewdale can fill cars. The benefit is they are clean. Construction has begun on putting solar panels on Perth airport.100% of the materials are sourced from W.A. Kewdale is in the area that the panels will supply electricity. Hydro electric works by water volume passing and generating electricity.Are you suggesting using some of that electricity to create hydrogen and then powering fuel cells with the hydrogen.What is the return on the fuel cell?

Couldn't you read the thread? All the answers are there.
25-07-2022 19:36
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18983)
dehammer wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:snip.
Unlike you, I actually understand what the science is. I did some research and found that, yes it could work in theory, but the necessary height would be nearly 2 MILLION feet. Obviously, there is no place on earth it would work.

IF we can ever get the efficiency of the fuel cell + electrolysis of hydrogen below 1% loss (i.e. 99+% efficient) this would work. At our current level of technology, it does not.

That is the difference between you and me. I do understand what I am talking about. You throw out phrases and such and think that it never work, just as those that said we would never fly, or that a carriage without a horse would never move. People like you do your best to block science, while people like me try to advance it.

There is a saying I heard as a child.
Small minds look at a problem and look to the sky and say "why me?"
Average minds look at a problem and then the sky, and say "why?"
Smart minds look at a problem, look to the sky, rub their jaws and say "why not?"

Maybe, one day, if you work at it, you can advance to the point you are saying "why". I will not hold my breath.

You actually think that your perpetual motion machine is science??????????!?

HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
25-07-2022 19:40
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18983)
IBdaMann wrote:
dehammer wrote:The reason smart people say "why not" is they look for solution instead of simply saying that everything is a failure before trying.

Only marginally correct. Smart people utilize the scientific method to eliminate non-solutions. Stupid people instead cling to their preferred non-solution.

You are relegated to clinging to your preferred non-solution because you are a scientifically illiterate moron who cannot distinguish the scientific method from a can of Pringles potato chips. This is why the "design" of your non-solution is so fluid and why it can be changed more often and more quickly than my daughter changes her clothes, i.e. because details simply don't matter in any non-solution.

dehammer wrote:Small minded people believe everything will fail

Small-minded people have to misrepresent the positions of others in order to better cling to their preferred non-solutions.

dehammer wrote:Have fun with the small mind never learning or find a way to improve things.

Have fun clinging to your non-solution and never adding value in any way.

dehammer wrote:You have obviously reached the pentacle of your success on the day you were born.

I was going to recommend you learn the words "pinnacle" and "pentacle" ... but that would require you to stop obsessing over your non-solution for a while, which I realize would be a short while too long ... so nevermind.

It is obvious that these two are going to deny the laws of thermodynamics and call it 'science'.

It has become a religion for them. There is no changing it.

The 2 million foot high Waterfall Electrolyzer will never get built. No one is ever going to build it for him.
The Bessler Wheel, like so many before it, will never work. At least it gives James something to waste his money on. A hobby.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
25-07-2022 19:43
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18983)
James_ wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:


You are relegated to clinging to your preferred non-solution because you are a scientifically illiterate moron who cannot distinguish the scientific method from a can of Pringles potato chips.



Insulting Pringles potato chips, really? Next it'll be the Ford Pinto. Where will your lunacy end?

Pringles aren't potato chips. They are reconstituted potatoes in the shape of a 'standard potato chip'. They deserve insult. A crime again the potato.

Ford Pintos are of course famous for their exploding gas tanks. Ford saw fit to mount the tank just behind the rear differential. In a rear end accident, the tank is crushed and the hot differential sets it afire. They deserve insult.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
25-07-2022 19:44
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18983)
James_ wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
dehammer wrote:The reason smart people say "why not" is they look for solution instead of simply saying that everything is a failure before trying.

Only marginally correct. Smart people utilize the scientific method to eliminate non-solutions. Stupid people instead cling to their preferred non-solution.

You are relegated to clinging to your preferred non-solution because you are a scientifically illiterate moron who cannot distinguish the scientific method from a can of Pringles potato chips. This is why the "design" of your non-solution is so fluid and why it can be changed more often and more quickly than my daughter changes her clothes, i.e. because details simply don't matter in any non-solution.

dehammer wrote:Small minded people believe everything will fail

Small-minded people have to misrepresent the positions of others in order to better cling to their preferred non-solutions.

dehammer wrote:Have fun with the small mind never learning or find a way to improve things.

Have fun clinging to your non-solution and never adding value in any way.

dehammer wrote:You have obviously reached the pentacle of your success on the day you were born.

I was going to recommend you learn the words "pinnacle" and "pentacle" ... but that would require you to stop obsessing over your non-solution for a while, which I realize would be a short while too long ... so nevermind.



Please don't tell me that Pintos caught fire when rear ended. That and their single over head cam had a lubrication problem so they didn't last any longer than a Yugo.
And now we know that gasoline powered automobiles are unsafe at any speed. A historical reference to the Corvair and why they were unsafe. They used gasoline engines like the Ford Pinto.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mqu-gRqt3g
To please Swan we need to ban all petrol products. Petrol is flammable so should not be used. Fortunately we have his wisdom to guide us.


Ford has had problems with spatial relationships and hydraulics for a long time now. They just can't get their head wrapped around them.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
25-07-2022 19:45
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18983)
duncan61 wrote:
DeHammer.Hydrogen cars work here in Perth as the plant in Kewdale can fill cars. The benefit is they are clean. Construction has begun on putting solar panels on Perth airport.100% of the materials are sourced from W.A. Kewdale is in the area that the panels will supply electricity. Hydro electric works by water volume passing and generating electricity.Are you suggesting using some of that electricity to create hydrogen and then powering fuel cells with the hydrogen.What is the return on the fuel cell?

Why is hydrogen 'clean'? Did someone wash it?


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
Edited on 25-07-2022 19:46
26-07-2022 02:59
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12231)
Into the Night wrote:
duncan61 wrote:DeHammer.Hydrogen cars work here in Perth as the plant in Kewdale can fill cars. The benefit is they are clean.
Why is hydrogen 'clean'? Did someone wash it?

Duncan was instructed to believe the following:

1. Fossils burn.
2. Fossils are sold commercially as fuel.
3. Carbon is a fossil.
4. Hydrocarbons are fossils.
5. Collectively, these fossils are "fossil fuels."
6. Fossil Fuels are unclean, and whosoever toucheth those things shall be unclean, and shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even (Leviticus 15:27) and every bed, whereon fossil fuels lieth is unclean: and every thing, whereon it sitteth, shall be unclean. (Leviticus 15:4)
7. The world needs energy, so any source of energy that is not unclean is therefore clean.

Duncan OBEYED and now he preaches that fossil fuels are unclean while preaching that hydrogen "is the way to go" despite your elaboration on hydrogen's high cost and danger, and despite hydrogen not producing any plant food to bolster earth's dangerously low levels of CO2. Reminder: all life on earth depends upon plants for survival. On the other hand, all life will continue to thrive if the ocean were to have to make do without a few additional gallons of water.

.
26-07-2022 03:31
duncan61
★★★★☆
(1911)
Perth does not have a smog problem but many cities do.A lot of car exhausts in a small area.Hydrogen cars do not emit smog.I use OXY/LPG for my plumbing work as it burns very clean and does not contaminate the copper and brass.I have the cutting torch for this set however it does not cut anywhere as deep as OXY/Acetylene.Some plumbers use OXY/Acetylene but the flame is dirty when you start up and clouds of soot are emitted.Not good in someone's house but fine in an industrial workshop.
26-07-2022 03:41
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12231)
duncan61 wrote:
Perth does not have a smog problem but many cities do.A lot of car exhausts in a small area.

What does that have to do with CO2?

duncan61 wrote:Hydrogen cars do not emit smog.

Smog is a result of O3 (ozone), not CO2.

duncan61 wrote:I use OXY/LPG for my plumbing work as it burns very clean and does not contaminate the copper and brass.I have the cutting torch for this set however it does not cut anywhere as deep as OXY/Acetylene.Some plumbers use OXY/Acetylene but the flame is dirty when you start up and clouds of soot are emitted.Not good in someone's house but fine in an industrial workshop.

The bottom line is that you believe that CO2 is pollution, yes?

.
26-07-2022 16:41
duncan61
★★★★☆
(1911)
Not at all IBDm.CO2 is a trace gas.I have learned so much on this forum.Thank you
26-07-2022 19:03
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(12231)
duncan61 wrote:Not at all IBDm.CO2 is a trace gas.I have learned so much on this forum.Thank you

This statement is totally unrelated, which is your way of confirming what I wrote.
26-07-2022 19:10
James_
★★★★☆
(1047)
IBdaMann wrote:


duncan61 wrote:Hydrogen cars do not emit smog.

Smog is a result of O3 (ozone), not CO2.




And where does ozone in the troposphere come from? From hydrocarbons. Hydrocarbons are emitted when burning fuels like petrol and diesel just as CO2 is also an emission. Interestingly enough hydrocarbons only contain hydrogen and carbon elements.
As to what you say, smog (ozone) could be said to be a byproduct of CO2 being generated. CnH2n+2 is the most common hydrocarbon associated with the emission of gasoline/petrol.
Obviously n represents any positive integer. If n is 7 then C7H16 would be the hydrocarbon's molecular composition.
Then if 7C + 7O2 (7 oxygen molecules) > 7CO2 + O. Then the O can bond with O2 to form O3. Of course O3 might be because of how O2 reacts to hydrocarbons.
Actually they say it is when NOx (nitrogen oxides) interact with hydrocarbons. And then what causes nitrogen oxides? From burning fuel. This then means that some of the CO2 in the atmosphere comes from pollution.
NOx is also and ODS (ozone depleting substance). So maybe there is good CO2 and bad CO2 depending on its source?

A hydrocarbon chain example;

....H.H.H.H.H
H-C-C-C-C-C-H
...H.H.H.H.H

Why it's CnH2n+2.

Edited on 26-07-2022 19:13
26-07-2022 20:34
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18983)
duncan61 wrote:
Perth does not have a smog problem but many cities do.A lot of car exhausts in a small area.Hydrogen cars do not emit smog.I use OXY/LPG for my plumbing work as it burns very clean and does not contaminate the copper and brass.I have the cutting torch for this set however it does not cut anywhere as deep as OXY/Acetylene.Some plumbers use OXY/Acetylene but the flame is dirty when you start up and clouds of soot are emitted.Not good in someone's house but fine in an industrial workshop.

I guess you have no idea of the chemistry behind smog either.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
26-07-2022 20:39
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(18983)
James_ wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:


duncan61 wrote:Hydrogen cars do not emit smog.

Smog is a result of O3 (ozone), not CO2.




And where does ozone in the troposphere come from? From hydrocarbons.

Ozone has no hydrogen or hydrocarbons.
James_ wrote:
Hydrocarbons are emitted when burning fuels like petrol and diesel

Gasoline does not emit gasoline when it is burned.
James_ wrote:
Interestingly enough hydrocarbons only contain hydrogen and carbon elements.
As to what you say, smog (ozone) could be said to be a byproduct of CO2 being generated. CnH2n+2 is the most common hydrocarbon associated with the emission of gasoline/petrol.
Obviously n represents any positive integer. If n is 7 then C7H16 would be the hydrocarbon's molecular composition.
Then if 7C + 7O2 (7 oxygen molecules) > 7CO2 + O. Then the O can bond with O2 to form O3. Of course O3 might be because of how O2 reacts to hydrocarbons.
Actually they say it is when NOx (nitrogen oxides) interact with hydrocarbons. And then what causes nitrogen oxides? From burning fuel. This then means that some of the CO2 in the atmosphere comes from pollution.

Hydrocarbons do not contain nitrogen.
James_ wrote:
NOx is also and ODS (ozone depleting substance). So maybe there is good CO2 and bad CO2 depending on its source?

So generating ozone deplete ozone...gotit.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit

nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan

While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
27-07-2022 01:17
James_
★★★★☆
(1047)
Into the Night wrote:

James_ wrote:
NOx is also and ODS (ozone depleting substance). So maybe there is good CO2 and bad CO2 depending on its source?

So generating ozone deplete ozone...gotit.



This might help you to better understand it. Ozone in the troposphere is pollution and is harmful to plant life as well as allowing for smog. In the stratosphere it is a shield that limits how much UV radiation makes it into the troposphere.
The experiment that I am pursuing would show a different source for stratospheric ozone (ozone layer).

We examine measurements from three aircraft platforms from the INTEX-B campaign, including a Canadian Cessna taking vertical profiles of ozone near Whistler Peak. The contribution to the mean simulated ozone profiles over Whistler is at least 7.2ppbv for Asian anthropogenic emissions and at least 3.5ppbv for lightning NOx emissions.
https://www.academia.edu/20161430/Trans_Pacific_transport_of_reactive_nitrogen_and_ozone_to_Canada_during_spring?email_work_card=view-paper
27-07-2022 03:33
duncan61
★★★★☆
(1911)
So its not the cars in L.A. that create the smog and getting your car smog certified is not real either
27-07-2022 04:55
James_
★★★★☆
(1047)
Hydrocarbons come from burning fuel. When hydrocarbons interact with nitrous oxide, ozone is generated. Ozone is also caused by lightning.
With the layers of the atmosphere, the tropopause is between the troposphere and the stratosphere (ozone layer). The tropopause can get as cold as -51º C. or
-60º F. The stratosphere can get as warms as 0º C. or 32º F. before cooling further away from the Earth's surface.

With the tropopause it is considered a cold, empty space.
Attached image:


Edited on 27-07-2022 04:57
Page 15 of 16<<<13141516>





Join the debate Gravity fed electrical generation system:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
My New Digital Currency System Will Destroy The USD, Euro & Make World Peace014-08-2022 11:29
It Is Perfect Safe To Begin Make Some Big Changes In The World Financial System011-08-2022 07:31
New Bank Type In Banking System To Give Power Back To The People010-08-2022 17:05
Many Big Ideas For Global Currencies Using Rules In The Current World Financial System010-08-2022 09:51
How The New Global World Economic Financial System Will Be130-07-2022 19:47
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact