Divine Revelation 1 - Bringing in Kinetic Energy of Air Molecules

[ltseung888]

See the attached xls file.

The explanation is based on:
1.  Kinetic Theory of Gases
2.  Conservation of Momentum
3.  Conservation of Energy (Kinetic energy of one dimensional collision)

The basic material should have been covered in Secondary School Physics.

Divine Wine is for All.

[exnihiloest]

Your mistake:
If B1 and B2 hit the piston at the same time, they have no effect onto the piston, because the resultant force onto the piston is null (F1 + F2 = 0 where F is the force vector applied oppositely by each ball to the piston: the forces cancel each other). The balls bounce back. No force, no work.
If B1 and B2 don't hit the piston at the same time, the effect of the first ball onto the piston is canceled just after, by the second ball. No work in a cycle.

It is not the first time that you spread this nonsense and lie. I read in your xls: "It is all Newtonian Physics covered in Secondary School Physics.". Your calculation in xl cells is false or irrelevant. I suggest you learn this physics. Alleged cop of 5.5 and divine miracles are incompatible with it.

*** Such insulting statements will be left here for all to see.   This is an example showing why many true scientists do not participate in such forums.
Edited by the Moderator - Lawrence Tseung ***

[ltseung888]

Your mistake:
If B1 and B2 hit the piston at the same time, they have no effect onto the piston, because the resultant force onto the piston is null (F1 + F2 = 0 where F is the force vector applied oppositely by each ball to the piston: the forces cancel each other). The balls bounce back. No force, no work.
If B1 and B2 don't hit the piston at the same time, the effect of the first ball onto the piston is canceled just after, by the second ball. No work in a cycle.

Please double and triple check your physics and mathematics.  Consult your professors, textbook and any qualified scientists and engineers.

The Piston is moving in the –ve X direction.  The effect of Ball B1 will be different from the effect of Ball B2.  This is the absolute scientific truth.  I shall defend this with all my heart, my soul and my Physics.

May God help you to learn the right Physics and Mathematics.

*** I am putting all information in one file and using the signs to show directions in the improved xls file.

[GibbsHelmholtz]

This topic will focus on the leading-out or bringing-in of energy from still air.

From the standpoint of the well-known kinetic theory of gases taught at secondary physics classes, air consists of molecules moving in space.  These molecules collide with one another in a random fashion.  They also collide with the walls of any container.  The force of collision gives rise to the pressure of gases.  These molecules are moving and thus have kinetic energy.

In an imaginary box containing 60 molecules, we can imagine that on average, 10 molecules move in the +X, -X, +Y, -Y, +Z and -Z directions.  The forces or pressures in all these directions are equal.  No net work can be done.

However, if 15 molecules now move in the +X direction and 9 molecules move in the -X, +Y, -Y, +Z and -Z directions, the pressure in the +X direction is much higher.  Work can be done.  However, the sum of the kinetic energy of these 60 molecules can remain unchanged.  The random motion is changed into an ordered motion.  The energy used to change the random motion can be very different from the now useful work that can be done.  Thus the always available kinetic energy of air molecules can be made to do useful work  The Law of Conservation of Energy will not be violated.

The first conclusive experiment with two or more (four recommended) tuning forks tries to show that the louder and last longer sound energy cannot come from the striking of the first tuning fork alone.  (The most impressive will be the resonance of 20 tuning forks to be captured on a video.)  Energy must come from somewhere.  The Tseung hypothesis is that the vibrating tuning fork will change the random motion of the air molecules into some pulsed order.  These pulsed ordered molecules can then push other tuning forks similar to pushing the swing.  The correct pushing frequency will excite these other tuning forks into sympathetic vibrations.  The extra energy comes from the existing kinetic energy of the air molecules.

This new understanding of resonance is very important.  The Tseung hypothesis essentially says that any motion or vibration can change the random motion of the air molecules.  A pure frequency vibration such as that from a tuning fork will change the random motion into an ordered pulsing motion.  This ordered pulsing motion is responsible for doing the useful work (pulsing other identical tuning forks).  The extra sound energy comes from the existing kinetic energy of the air molecules.

There is no violation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics as the system is NOT a closed system.  Theoretically, the sound can be transmitted all over the world with diminishing amplitude. 

I think this is a plausible explanation for extra energy and its mechanism.  So far I cannot see resonance could produce extra energy, but it's possible to extract energy if we can somehow change random motion into order with static force.  I did a simulation of this randomness in energy.  The total energy comes off the battery.  The battery can be seen as environment energy.  Then it goes into random oscillation.   If I were to connect a resistor randomly, it would take a long time to siphon off the energy not saying if I put it in a spot where energy canceled out. 

  Brownian randomness

[exnihiloest]

To convert random motion into useful work is known as "Maxwell's Demon". It contradicts the second law of thermodynamics. Nevertheless this law being statistical, it could be incorrect at a microscopic or nanoscopic scale in space or time.
It is not yet obvious if a MD is feasible. There are arguments for and against (a new one yesterday: http://fr.arxiv.org/abs/1205.3028, although I hate expressions like "can never be violated").
Until now the alleged Maxwell's demon experiments that have been realized don't show production of energy beyond the experimental uncertainty. The Tseung hypothesis is just fuzzy gibberish that can't challenge thermodynamics. Only strong experimental duplicable results could show the validity of the principle, and there is not yet one.

[GibbsHelmholtz]

To convert random motion into useful work is known as "Maxwell's Demon". It contradicts the second law of thermodynamics. Nevertheless this law being statistical, it could be incorrect at a microscopic or nanoscopic scale in space or time.
It is not yet obvious if a MD is feasible. There are arguments for and against (a new one yesterday: http://fr.arxiv.org/abs/1205.3028, although I hate expressions like "can never be violated").
Until now the alleged Maxwell's demon experiments that have been realized don't show production of energy beyond the experimental uncertainty. The Tseung hypothesis is just fuzzy gibberish that can't challenge thermodynamics. Only strong experimental duplicable results could show the validity of the principle, and there is not yet one.

Exn,

I have a question.  If we have an input source where the input impedance is 0.  Voltage is only at say... .1mV at 10 Mhz.  How can I convert it to useful work.  If can, what is the max power we can get in theory?

[ltseung888]

Please do the experiment.

You should be able to get a signal generator, a speaker and a cup easily.  Adjust the signal generator so that the wavelength of the sound and the height of the cup has the relatonship (height = 1/4 wavelength). 

The sound will be many times louder.  If you want a visual confirmation, download the winscope program.  Use you PC microphone to capture the two sounds (before the cup and after the cup at resonance).

Then ask the question - why is the sound so much louder?  Where does the extra energy come from?

Without doing the experiment, you are wasting time.

[muDped]

Another experiment which produces a similar effect
is done by placing a suitably sized capacitance across
the terminals of a permanent magnet loudspeaker.

When a signal generator is attached and the applied
frequency is varied until resonance is found there will
be a large increase in the audio output of the speaker.

At resonance the efficiency of the transducer is enhanced.

[exnihiloest]

Exn,

I have a question.  If we have an input source where the input impedance is 0.  Voltage is only at say... .1mV at 10 Mhz.  How can I convert it to useful work.  If can, what is the max power we can get in theory?

If the input impedance is zero, the max possible power is infinite. But this is not physical.
If I had a source of 1mV at 10 Mhz and wanted a useful work, I would power a LC circuit and rectify the overvoltage obtained from the resonance, to get DC.

The problem with random motion, is that there are random frequencies and we can't make the electrons to "cooperate". And if they don't cooperate, voltages are not enough to be rectified.

[GibbsHelmholtz]

If the input impedance is zero, the max possible power is infinite. But this is not physical.
If I had a source of 1mV at 10 Mhz and wanted a useful work, I would power a LC circuit and rectify the overvoltage obtained from the resonance, to get DC.

The problem with random motion, is that there are random frequencies and we can't make the electrons to "cooperate". And if they don't cooperate, voltages are not enough to be rectified.

Cool, that's what I thought too.  We can extract power equal to the source.  The thing is it's hard to make an LC circuit that could extract this power.  Imagine the 60 Hz grid.  They put out a lots of power, and we know they operate at 60 Hz.  How can we tap into this?  I can hook two wire straight to the power line, but if I'm sitting in my house and want to do it, I have to bypass all the capacitive reactance along the path to the source.  Is it possible to do? 

[exnihiloest]

It is not hard to realize a LC circuit resonant at 50 or 60 hz, with a big multi-turn loop tuned with a capacitor, and to put it under a HV power line, in a vertical plane. Some people already made it and get electricity by induction. Of course it is strictly forbidden, the energy being stolen from the power company. Stolen energy is "free energy" but I'm not sure that we understand here "free energy" in this sense.  

[GibbsHelmholtz]

It is not hard to realize a LC circuit resonant at 50 or 60 hz, with a big multi-turn loop tuned with a capacitor, and to put it under a HV power line, in a vertical plane. Some people already made it and get electricity by induction. Of course it is strictly forbidden, the energy being stolen from the power company. Stolen energy is "free energy" but I'm not sure that we understand here "free energy" in this sense.  

Thanks for the idea, but I think you got me wrong.  I'm not talking about stealing a few watts from power line.  I'm talking about stealing as much as the power line gives... pretty much MW or more lol.  Your condition is limited in power transmitting.  First a coil tune to 60 Hz is the right idea, but the energy can only build up over time.  Something like a few watts build up to hundreds of watts reactively and you extract it.   The amount of power is limited by capacitance of the air.  Even if you put the resonating coil under HV power line, the capacitance is still too small.  If you sit anywhere on earth, it is even smaller.  Of course the idea is first to steal... I mean test it from power line, then use the concept to extract other sources.  If you want to steal MW, first you need to match the capacitive reactance of the air to power line.  Your coil would need to be thousands of Henries  depends on where you are.  It's impractical.

There is a way, though, to bypass/neutralize the capacitance not by building a coil to match capacitive reactance.  We can ionize the air and break down the dielectric.  The air then is a conductor leading a path to the source.  Of course it's not real to send a lighting spark all the way to power line, but to reduce the capacitance enough to attain power.  A more practical way is to reduce the permittivity of the air.  This can be done with high frequency.  At plasma frequency, the air would be a conductor. 

We can send high frequency off a building to neutralize capacitance path to the ionosphere and extract ton of power from it, but it is not necessary and unsafe.  I believe when high voltage whether from BEMF or of sort would produce extremely high frequency.  It effect would neutralize the coulomb forces and allow electron to gives energy, then fall back to a state below its original energy state if not get captured. lol  It's just my thought.   

 

[exnihiloest]

...
A more practical way is to reduce the permittivity of the air.  This can be done with high frequency.  At plasma frequency, the air would be a conductor. 

You can create a conductor path through air, but not change its permittivity.

We can send high frequency off a building to neutralize capacitance path to the ionosphere and extract ton of power from it, but it is not necessary and unsafe.  I believe when high voltage whether from BEMF or of sort would produce extremely high frequency.  It effect would neutralize the coulomb forces and allow electron to gives energy, then fall back to a state below its original energy state if not get captured. lol  It's just my thought.   

Even if we could establish an electrical channel with the ionosphere, I'm not sure of the result. In the sporadic E layers (at 90-150 km from the ground), which contains the highest density of electrons but are not stable, we have at maximum 10^5 electrons/cm³, which is on the order of one billionth of a billionth of the number of free electrons in the same volume of metal. The channel should have a tremendously large section, we would not get much current, and we can also presume that the time for the ionospheric layers to rebuild their electronic charge is far from being instantaneous.
It's an utopia, both theoretically and practically.