Skip to main content

TR Memescape

  • Talkrational: It was a analogy in the most tortured TR style

Topic: Tesla's heat engine (split from DDWFTTW) (Read 2819 times) previous topic - next topic - Topic derived from Direct Down Wind Fast...

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Re: Tesla's heat engine (split from DDWFTTW)
Reply #50
Fix your quotes if you're hoping for any of us to try and figure out what you're trying to say.

LOL...

You seem really anxious or impatient. I barely finished writing and editing the post. demanding I answer your questions. chill out.

Re: Tesla's heat engine (split from DDWFTTW)
Reply #51
If you close off an open system and try to make it a closed system (draw a box around it) it can't work.

I don't think you're getting my point.  ALL systems are closed systems to the extent that nothing ever leaves or enters our universe. 

Nonsense, IMHO.
.
Quote
The trick is to draw the boundaries appropriately.

More nonsense, IMHO.

Quote
  If the Tesla engine works in the way you describe, it should continue to work with its "cold reservoir" operating as part of the engine.


OK, so what?

Quote
If not, you'll have to explain to me what communication the cold reservoir needs to have with the outside world.

I agree that the cold reservoir (sic) is part of the engine. (Though strictly speaking not a "reservoir".)

Quote
Quote
Tom Booth: A wind car wouldn't go faster than the wind inside a box either I don't suppose.


Sure it would - as long as there's wind in the box.

More nonsense.

Your box would have to be big enough to contain the earth and sun as it is the uneven heating of earth's atmosphere by the sun that induces the wind to blow.

Is this the question you wanted me to answer?

The cold hole is part of or connected to the engine just as the drinking birds head is connected to that engine.

But it does have to communicate with the outside world.

If you cool by converting heat energy into another form, then that converted energy must leave (communicate with) the outside world. Cold is not a thing, it is the absence of heat. The nothing does not have to communicate with anything however the energy that was heat energy but has been converted to "work" or electrical energy or whatever MUST be able to exit the system. It could do so in a number of ways.

A simple and readily demonstrable way is to have the heat get used up and leave the system by helping water molecules escape. (change state or evaporate). The heat gets carried away from the "cold hole" as kinetic energy, or as the internal molecular energy of the water vapor.

IMO this is far from any kind of "cold reservoir". It only exists as long as the engine is running.
  • Last Edit: October 27, 2017, 09:58:12 PM by Tom Booth

Re: Tesla's heat engine (split from DDWFTTW)
Reply #52
You seem really anxious or impatient.

Nope - just getting annoyed as hell.

Quote
I barely finished writing and editing the post. demanding I answer your questions. chill out.

You had time to quote my question, make another post, and ignore the question you posted.

Re: Tesla's heat engine (split from DDWFTTW)
Reply #53
And now you have yet another post that's entirely inside quote tags.  If you're not going to bother with this, then don't expect us to.

Re: Tesla's heat engine (split from DDWFTTW)
Reply #54
Sorry folks - it turns out I dragged another humber into this.  I honestly didn't know.

Re: Tesla's heat engine (split from DDWFTTW)
Reply #55
And now you have yet another post that's entirely inside quote tags.  If you're not going to bother with this, then don't expect us to.

Sorry, sometimes I have no choice but to post from my cell phone if I'm going to try to participate here at all. It is difficult in the extreme trying to edit posts while on the run between classes on a cell phone, but I will try to preview my posts before posting from now on if such minor errors are going to upset you so much. Or wait till I have time to fire up a computer. I'm in the process of rereading the thread and trying to follow up on any questions I've missed from you or anyone else, now that I'm off for the weekend.

Re: Tesla's heat engine (split from DDWFTTW)
Reply #56
Quote
Personally I'm inclined to think that the failing is on the part of the reader considering the extent to which the modern world is dependent on his discoveries and inventions.

So, how does a heat engine work?

Why do you need a temperature difference?

How does a heat engine exploit random molecular motion (Heat) and bring order to that motion so as to be able to control it and direct it in such a way that usable energy might be extracted?

What methods have been employed to accomplish this?

What are the component parts of such a device? Could we improve it?

How many different types of heat engines are implied in that "by some means or another"?

How does a heat engine actually convert heat into work? How does a refrigeration system work? How could these two systems possibly be brought together in one mechanism?


These are pretty mundane questions to put to such a "maverick" inventor.

They are rhetorical questions not posed to anyone in particular.


Quote
Probably the key question is "what medium is used to transfer cold to heat and heat to cold".
 


Today heat is transferred from whatever heat source, combustion, solar, industrial waste heat, whatever through a heat exchanger. Most often in a Stirling engine, a simple metal plate.

But ambient heat in the air does not exactly need to be transferred, it just is, if you are talking in terms of refrigerants.  Heat is in the air.

When you take the heat out of the air you are left with cold air. Again there is not a "transfer" in the sense of transfer from one thing to a refrigerant and back to the other thing. Ambient air itself is the refrigerant and also the carrier of heat. It is drawn into the system, compressed to release the heat, which heat is subsequently or really simultaneously converted to mechanical/electrical output, then expanded. The expanded air at the end of the whole process is your "cold hold". The cold air is then simply released to atmosphere to be reheated by the sun again if not put to better use first.


Quote

 The list of refrigerants and their physical properties is used as a fundamental design basis for most designed systems because it sets the boundaries of how the system can perform.

The earliest refrigerators used ordinary atmospheric air as a refrigerant. This is what Tesla proposed. Lind's Air Liquefaction machine was essentially just an air-cycle refrigerator using the air itself as the refrigerant to cool itself. He called this a "Self-Cooling Method" of Air Liquefaction which Tesla refers to in his article about his "Self-Acting Engine". He relates:

Quote
In the process, as I had primarily conceived it, for the utilization of the energy of the ambient medium, there were five essential elements in combination, and each of these had to be newly designed and perfected, as no such machines existed.  The mechanical oscillator was the first element of this combination, and having perfected this, I turned to the next, which was an air-compressor of a design in certain respects resembling that of the mechanical oscillator.  Similar difficulties in the construction were again encountered, but the work was pushed vigorously, and at the close of 1894 I had completed these two elements of the combination, and thus produced an apparatus for compressing air, virtually to any desired pressure, incomparably simpler, smaller, and more efficient than the ordinary.  I was just beginning work on the third element, which together with the first two would give a refrigerating machine of exceptional efficiency and simplicity, when a misfortune befell me in the burning of my laboratory, which crippled my labors and delayed me.  Shortly afterward Dr. Carl Linde announced the liquefaction of air by a self-cooling process, demonstrating that it was practicable to proceed with the cooling until liquefaction of the air took place.  This was the only experimental proof which I was still wanting that energy was obtainable from the medium in the manner contemplated by me.

The history of air-cycle refrigeration is very interesting. It is a good choice for a refrigerant in this application for many obvious reasons. Availability, cost (free everywhere), non-polluting / non-toxic, and effective.

PDF:  http://www.hevac-heritage.org/electronic_books/refrig_history/2-coldair.pdf

John Gorrie, who invented the air cycle refrigeration in 1844 intimates in his patent that his air-cycle  ice making machine, though very crude and cumbersome required almost no outside energy input. ( Patent #: US000008080 )

One of the main reasons it isn't used more often today is that the temperature differential created by such an air-cycle is too extreme. You want your refrigerator a little above freezing not liquid air temperatures. Air-cycle systems are mostly used in cryogenic applications. Also on aircraft due to the simplicity and light weight and because as an open system it can run on ram air as the refrigerant(air) compressor.

Air cycle refrigeration is considered inefficient for domestic refrigeration because after creating an extremely hot temperature, which is discarded, whats left is extreme cold that is unusable for most purposes without adding heat back.


Quote

Again, where in the electromagnetic, weak nuclear, strong nuclear or gravity are you going to discover your solution?  Or do you propose a 5th force?

I don't know exactly what you are getting at. There is nothing new to discover. Tesla was using 1800's technology.


Re: Tesla's heat engine (split from DDWFTTW)
Reply #57
sterling engine transfers heat from hot to cold plates
putting a fan and a alcohol on the cold plate will not help with conserving energy since it takes energy to cool the alcahol to liquid again

Probably true, if you are trying to use alcohol, or any other exotic fluid or gas that needs to be recovered. That would also make it a closed system. Evaporative cooling with water, however doesn't present such problems as it can simply return back to the environment, essentially a giant evap-cooler in it's own right.

Quote
beaming energy into space concept would be similar
https://spectrum.ieee.org/energywise/green-tech/solar/efficient-airconditioning-by-beaming-heat-into-space

but its only increasing its hot/cool differencial energy pools

If it cools the ambient environment a few degrees "for free" then I would think you could still operate an LTD Stirling engine with that temperature gradient. Again, by Tesla's analysis, the energy has escaped the system in a different form (in this case infrared light beamed into space) keeping the "cold hole" cold. The cold hole being the panel or heat exchanger attached directly to the engine

Some small model Stirling LTD (low temperature differential) engines being built and sold today can run on just a few degrees ΔT

Probably you couldn't get much energy, but it would be a way to make SOME energy available.

This would be yet another very simple way to "falsify" Tesla's theory, (or apply it, if it worked). Assuming you have access to such technology. (The heat converting panels that is).

Re: Tesla's heat engine (split from DDWFTTW)
Reply #58
You can take the idea of coupling your cold hole to space as a sink, but your energy account will then show an increase in entropy in space.  Plus, you have to define HOW this coupling is occurring and what the physical attributes are w.r.t. this coupling (heat flux, etc.).


How is having your energy account showing an increase in entropy in space a problem?

As far as coupling, what's wrong with simply attaching the photonic cooler directly to the cold plate of the Stirling engine?

How would this not be an application of Tesla's "by some means or other" proposal voiced over 100 years ago?

"by some means or other, in this enclosure a medium were maintained which would have little energy, and that on the outer side of the same there would be the ordinary ambient medium with much energy.  Under these assumptions the energy would flow through the path O, as indicated by the arrow, and might then be converted on its passage into some other form of energy.  The question was, Could such a condition be attained?  Could we produce artificially such a "sink" for the energy of the ambient medium to flow in?"

I've been suggesting for years that the reason Tesla's idea could work is that solar radiation hitting the earth will eventually radiate into outer-space, one way or another. But ordinary heat can't escape earth's atmosphere easily. By converting the heat to some other form you speed up the process, make it easier for the energy to continue on its way from the sun into outer space. The earth is just a temporary pit-stop.

clip from overunity.com
Quote
Tom Booth

    Full Member
    ***
    Posts: 149

Re: Tesla's Ambient Heat Engine Theory - Right or Wrong ?
« Reply #41 on: December 20, 2012

"Yes, Right. They were all right, Carnot, Clausius, Lord Kelvin, they all knew exactly what they were talking about. Logically, if you have to make heat to get it above ambient to use it ,and then you do use it and you end up with cold, you will have to heat the cold up again to get the heat to use it again. There is no way you can win.

Tesla scratched his head a little bit and said what if instead of using heat (above ambient), you make a "cold hole". Then you can use the heat of the ambient as it flows in naturally and you will never run out so you don't have to put it back. It is no longer a closed loop. It is a linear system.

Sunshine Hits the earth >>>> Hot Ambient > Heat > Heat converted to Pressure in a Heat engine > Motive Force (work) > Electricity Generation > Eventual heat dissipation into Outer Space >>>>>

It becomes a unidirectional flow. A temporary interruption of the flow of energy emanating from the sun to be utilized before it continues on its way to other planets. Not a closed loop, not a constant uphill battle to put the energy back up at a higher level to repeat a cycle. It isn't a cycle, its a flow like a river that can be intercepted so as to extract some energy."

Look at all this energy man made electric lights are radiating into space:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RGNhZ292Zg
  • Last Edit: October 28, 2017, 08:45:45 AM by Tom Booth

Re: Tesla's heat engine (split from DDWFTTW)
Reply #59
But can we produce cold in a given portion of the space and cause the heat to flow in continually?..." 

Yes.  But as the heat flows in the space warms up.  If we want to keep it cool we can pump that heat out.  And we'll never be able to extract more energy from the heat flowing in than we'll have to expend on pumping the heat back out.




Once we convert the heat to electricity we can feed it into the electric grid which is radiating enough energy into space to satisfy the entropy accounting.

Probably don't need to add any photonic cooler, just hooking the engine to the grid should work.

Re: Tesla's heat engine (split from DDWFTTW)
Reply #60
Did you read any of it?

Yup - all of it. 

Let me ask you this...  why don't we have such engines?  Is it because of a government or big energy conspiracy?  Is it because no one since has been as smart as Tesla (or even as smart as those that believe Tesla was right)?


Not sure if I fully answered this already, but you probably were asked the same question about your faster than wind wind car.

Tesla's engine idea was an amalgamation of air compresor, air-cycle system refrigerator, air liquefaction machine and heat engine rolled into one and custom fassioned to work together. It was never going to happen by accident. Someone would have to build it and have a very good idea how to do that. It brings together a number of related disciplines. I think very few people have ever been competent in all of them.
I just meant, with the head dry, it won't start working.  You'd have to wet the head.  I agree that you could wet it with hot water, and no motion would take place, until evaporation cooled the water and the head bulb below the temperature of the body.

Yes but my question to everyone specifically was: does it violate the second law of thermodynamics? Is it doing the very thing which the second law declares is impossible?

It looks to me like a heat engine operating on a single reservoir. Something I've been informed repeatedly is impossible according to the second law and the reason why Tesla's idea could never work.

IMO observing this thing operate, it is converting heat into mechanical work. The work is used to drive a refrigerating system. The bird dunks its beak in the water then swings up and back and forth. Without this swinging about, without the energy conversion and mechanical movement it would not keep going. By that I mean it isn't just passive use of an existing cold space or existing temperature difference. It is converting heat to work and applying that work to the end of maintaining the temperature difference.

This is not just Tesla's wild speculation. Millions of these toys have been sold.

It is supposedly impossible. Yet there it is. It would be helpful if someone could explain how and/or why this toy is or is not a violation of the 2nd law.

Also, if this toy works in pronciple, which it obviously does, why would not tesla's ambient heat "self-acting engine" work as well?

Seems to me the toy works on the same principles Tesla outlined in detail.

I don't know how anyone can accept something is impossible when there are a million of these devices out there bobbing away which anyone can send for for a few dollars and see operate on their own kitchen table or their own office desk or book shelf.

Re: Tesla's heat engine (split from DDWFTTW)
Reply #61
...my question to everyone specifically was: does it violate the second law of thermodynamics? Is it doing the very thing which the second law declares is impossible?

... It would be helpful if someone could explain how and/or why this toy is or is not a violation of the 2nd law.



Nobody wants to take a stab at this?

Legend has it; Einstein could not figure out how this drinking bird novelty item actually worked.

Tesla's paper, on the other hand, provides a perfectly transparent description of the working principle, IMO.

Problem is, Tesla was, well, what was he doing exactly? Pretty much, in his own words: "This seemed to be contrary to the statements of Carnot and Lord Kelvin before referred to, but I concluded from the theory of the process that such a result could be attained."

The second law according to:

Thomson (Lord Kelvin): "It is impossible by a cyclic process to take heat from a reservoir and to convert it into work without simultaneously transferring heat from a hot to a cold reservoir."

Clausius:  "It is impossible to devise an engine which, working in a cycle, shall produce no effect other than the transfer of heat from a colder to a hotter body"

Planck: "It is impossible to construct an engine which, working in a complete cycle, will produce no effect other than raising of a weight and the cooling of a heat reservoir."

The Kelvin-Planck principle: "No process is possible whose sole result is the absorption of heat from a reservoir and the conversion of this heat into work"

The little bird seems to laugh at all these pronouncements and continues merrily along.

around 2:33 "Now of course this isn't any kind of perpetual motion, heat is constantly being extracted to keep the water evaporating"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-0-zH4Ip7w

Can it raise a weight?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUvc0apUIYQ


Re: Tesla's heat engine (split from DDWFTTW)
Reply #62

  • MikeB
Re: Tesla's heat engine (split from DDWFTTW)
Reply #63
The second link actually has some incorrect detail on how it works:

"The goop in his butt is methylene chloride, which has a very low boiling point, and therefore evaporates quickly. At room temperature, one or two degrees temperature difference causes the bright red chemical to climb to his head. Suddenly topheavy, he falls over. The felt head, soaked in the water from the cup, cools the methylene chloride, and it drains back to the bottom. The bird rights itself, and it starts all over again."

Oops, no, the cooling of the head is what reduces pressure there and allows the fluid to climb the tube.  When the bird leans over, the bottom of the tube lifts above the fluid level in the bottom bulb but is still angled slightly down toward the bottom bulb, and vapor makes its way up the tube while the fluid drains back to the bottom.

Anyhow, no second law violation observed because there is the expected transfer of heat from the warmer reservoir to the cooler reservoir.  I'm sure Einstein could easily see how it worked, if it was made from transparent glass so he could have seen the actions of the fluid.

Re: Tesla's heat engine (split from DDWFTTW)
Reply #64
Tesla's idea is IMO readily "falsifiable", not simply by appeal to authority or so-called "Law".

How exactly would you falsify his idea?  Simply failing to make such an engine a million different ways wouldn't do it.
 

There are numerous statements of supposed fact asserted in Tesla's article that are IMO clear enough to be demonstrated experimentally one way or another. There are several simple experiments that I've already done or that could be done, given enough time and resources, that would settle the mater from testing the various individual components up to and including building the entire engine.

His main assertion is that heat engines CONVERT heat so that, although a cold reservoir is necessary, it doesn't necessarily have to heat up. In other words, if you set a very efficient heat engine (The Stirling engine is I think the most efficient heat engine we know of today) on top of a lab grade cryogenic Dewar flask full of any number of available cold substances from ordinary ice from the refrigerator to liquefied gasses...

If the heat engine is intercepting and converting the heat, the substance in the flask (or cold hole) should remain colder longer than a control where an identical engine sits on an identical flask containing an identical portion of an identical cold substance. The experiment could be varied by having one engine running with a load and another without.

Theoretically, a heat engine under a heavy load should be converting more heat than a freewheeling engine with no load. So the ice or whatever should stay cold longer where the engine is converting more of the heat.

Heat input and output could be carefully metered and measured.

This simple experiment alone should provide enough data to determine if Tesla's idea has any merit whatsoever. If for whatever reason ice melts faster under a working engine, perhaps because it is pumping heat from one side to the other of the engine faster than the non-functional control, then, his idea that you could build a heat engine efficient enough to never melt the ice at all pretty much falls flat I should think. Depending on the results, one could move forward from there with additional experiments.

Certainly I would not want to start out sinking the millions of dollars it might take to tool up to manufacture a full scale working engine.

Quote
Perhaps you're just not doing it quite right.

as far as "failing to make such an engine in a million different ways" I know of very very few who have ever even tried.

Here is one: James Place.

Someone mailed me this material which is a stock offer from the Standard Power Company someone found in an old chest in an attic. http://peoplesresearchcenter.com/james_place/standard_power_company.html

I havn't been able to find any additional information on this Standard Power Company, but obviously it never got off the ground. There is a design for an engine, lots of testimonials and such to prove that it could work but as far as I know, it was never built.

Quote
...So given that Tesla isn't around anymore, the burden is on you to prove that case.  When I claimed it was possible to make a vehicle that goes directly downwind faster than the wind I can assure you that nearly EVERYONE (including professors of aero and physics) told me I was a nutcase.  The burden of proof it would appear was on me.  So I built a vehicle and demonstrated it.  I'm not asking that you do any more than I did.

I've spent about $3,000 on a metal lathe and other machining equipment. Recently someone gave us a building that was about to be foreclosed on. We just had to come up with the back taxes, but there is enough space to live and also for me to set up a workshop. Finding the time to work on anything though has been difficult. As mentioned before, I'm attending college full time on a grant, and really don't have time to be writing this post, but I do think this is important. I have like half a dozen past due assignments I should be working on.

Quote
Quote
I've been banned from enough science forums to know that the whole subject of "perpetual motion" is largely Taboo. It's policy.

I can assure you that you won't be banned here for your views on perpetual motion.  In fact I don't know that there's anything you could ever do or say to get banned from Talkrational.  Don't worry about taboo or policy.  Just make your case.

Right, and that from the guy who just finished calling me an idiot/retard as well as a "condescending prick"? besides apologizing to everybody for having me here?

Quote
Quote
It is the policy of the patent office to reject any such claim. There's no money in it. Only ostracism.

Not true.  I have dozens of patents.  I could file a patent for a perpetual motion machine if  I choose.  However, this is a special case.  To have my application reviewed I would have to provide a working model - as should be the case since a patent must disclose an invention to such detail that it could be built by anyone practiced in the art.  And since NO ONE is practiced in the art of perpetual motion it's up to the applicant to demonstrate.

Many inventors rely on funding raised AFTER THEY HAVE A PATENT. I know from experience it is very difficult to acquire any kind of funding for this sort of endeavor. especially without patent protection. Just building a very small working prototype could take thousands of dollars and thousands of man hours. As yet, I don't have those kinds of resources, though I don't think you can say I haven't tried:

https://www.gofundme.com/2fsahck

https://experiment.com/projects/hohohltuqpivlpspyewk/methods

Or that I'm not working on it.

Quote
Quote
Why should anyone bother sinking R&D into something that, the scientific community has declared for 100+ years, is patently impossible?

To prove them wrong and get filthy rich.  You can be absolutely certain I'd do it if I believed it.  But so far I have seen NO evidence that suggests it's possible.

And by the way, talking to birds wasn't the extent of Tesla's kookery in his later years.  He proposed things that were provably bullshit, and by all accounts did so in some cases dishonestly.


As far as I know, it would be difficult to get a patent, even with a working prototype, on a technology that was described in detail more than 100 years ago.

I've been turned down for backing from various sources for two reasons. 1) the idea is "impossible" and 2) its not patentable.


  • Last Edit: October 29, 2017, 10:05:39 AM by Tom Booth

Re: Tesla's heat engine (split from DDWFTTW)
Reply #65
Well. a couple things:

The second link actually has some incorrect detail on how it works:

"The goop in his butt is methylene chloride, which has a very low boiling point, and therefore evaporates quickly. At room temperature, one or two degrees temperature difference causes the bright red chemical to climb to his head. Suddenly topheavy, he falls over. The felt head, soaked in the water from the cup, cools the methylene chloride, and it drains back to the bottom. The bird rights itself, and it starts all over again."

Oops, no, the cooling of the head is what reduces pressure there and allows the fluid to climb the tube. 


I agree, but I think it is important that the reason the fluid is climbing the tube is not from the reduced pressure from the cooling alone but also the simultaneous heating by the surrounding ambient medium. Lets not forget where the energy is ultimately coming from.

Quote
When the bird leans over, the bottom of the tube lifts above the fluid level in the bottom bulb but is still angled slightly down toward the bottom bulb, and vapor makes its way up the tube while the fluid drains back to the bottom.

Anyhow, no second law violation observed because there is the expected transfer of heat from the warmer reservoir to the cooler reservoir.  I'm sure Einstein could easily see how it worked, if it was made from transparent glass so he could have seen the actions of the fluid.

OK, thanks for putting forward your thoughts on this.

Personally, I don't see the cold head as any kind of reservoir. The only reservoir is the surrounding ambient air. It is heat taken from the surrounding ambient air that allows the change of state from liquid to gas which captures the heat or "converts" it from one form of energy to another.

Heat is being drained from the immediate vicinity of the birds head but not into a "cold reservoir". Unless you can call heat locked up by an energy conversion a "reservoir". The heat is traveling away into the surrounding air carried by escaping H2O molecules. The surrounding air is the Hot reservoir not the cold reservoir.

Re: Tesla's heat engine (split from DDWFTTW)
Reply #66
Quote from: spork
I can assure you that you won't be banned here for your views on perpetual motion.  In fact I don't know that there's anything you could ever do or say to get banned from Talkrational.  Don't worry about taboo or policy.  Just make your case.

Right, and that from the guy who just finished calling me an idiot/retard...

Why lie about things that we can see here in black and white!?

Quote
...as well as a "condescending prick"? besides apologizing to everybody for having me here?

Yes - that was me.  And that says absolutely nothing about whether you would be banned here for talking about perpetual motion or anything else.  I will say again - just make your case.  You can do it while being a condescending prick or not.  But that's what it will take to convince people.

Quote
Many inventors rely on funding raised AFTER THEY HAVE A PATENT. I know from experience it is very difficult to acquire any kind of funding for this sort of endeavor. especially without patent protection. Just building a very small working prototype could take thousands of dollars and thousands of man hours.

Offering excuses for why you haven't or can't make your case is far less compelling than actually making your case.

Quote
As yet, I don't have those kinds of resources, though I don't think you can say I haven't tried:

https://www.gofundme.com/2fsahck

Yes - I had seen that.  I had a good laugh.

Re: Tesla's heat engine (split from DDWFTTW)
Reply #67
Personally I think there is a bit of a "Maxwell's Demon" thing going on in that fast moving gas (air) molecules are delivering energy to the inertially "heavy" water molecules knocking them loose to help the water evaporate, which in effect is sorting out the faster moving (hot) air molecules in the immediate area surrounding the birds head and/or leaving the coldest air molecules behind. Or what  exactly happens to the heat during a change of state from liquid to gas?

The main point is, the conversion of "heat" into another form of energy that can be removed from the "cold hole" easily, or by using very little energy, is the essence of Tesla's idea.

  • MikeB
Re: Tesla's heat engine (split from DDWFTTW)
Reply #68
Yes, how to account for the "cold reservoir".  In one sense perhaps the water can be viewed as such.  The evaporation phase change (liquid to vapor) continually uses or sinks heat.  It is clear that there is a flow of heat from the surroundings into the body and a flow of heat out of the head into the wet covering, used in the phase change of the water.

Re: Tesla's heat engine (split from DDWFTTW)
Reply #69
It looks to me like a heat engine operating on a single reservoir. Something I've been informed repeatedly is impossible according to the second law and the reason why Tesla's idea could never work.

IMO observing this thing operate, it is converting heat into mechanical work. The work is used to drive a refrigerating system. The bird dunks its beak in the water then swings up and back and forth. Without this swinging about, without the energy conversion and mechanical movement it would not keep going. By that I mean it isn't just passive use of an existing cold space or existing temperature difference. It is converting heat to work and applying that work to the end of maintaining the temperature difference.

t is supposedly impossible. Yet there it is. It would be helpful if someone could explain how and/or why this toy is or is not a violation of the 2nd law.

Converting heat to work is possible (and consistent with the second law) when there is a temperature difference.  There is a temperature difference between the upper and lower bulbs in the bird because the upper bulb cools evaporatively when the beak is wet, and that temperature difference is why it's possible for the bird to do work.  When the bird dips down and "drinks" some water, the evaporation of that water renews the temperature difference.  Eventually it will drink all the water and stop moving.  If you wanted it to keep going, you'd have to refill the bucket, which would require work (or an increase in entropy somewhere else). 

In understanding why this doesn't violate anything. it might help to notice that if you left it entirely alone, the bucket of water would evaporate.  A cork floating in the water would move, gradually, as the water level drops.  Is that perpetual motion?  Obviously not, because after a while the water is all gone.  It's exactly the same with the bird.  The water is not in equilibrium when it's in the bucket.  In fact, the bird helps the water evaporate more quickly, so that the system arrives at equilibrium sooner than without the bird.

What the second law actually forbids are processes that decrease entropy.  For instance,  a process that creates a temperature differential when none was before, which decreases entropy, and does not at the same time increase the entropy of something else.  The bird increases entropy by allowing more water to evaporate.

Re: Tesla's heat engine (split from DDWFTTW)
Reply #70
The main point is, the conversion of "heat" into another form of energy that can be removed from the "cold hole" easily, or by using very little energy, is the essence of Tesla's idea.

Again, there's nothing wrong with converting heat into work - that's what heat engines do.  But heat exists only when there is a temperature differential.  That temperature differential has to be created and/or maintained somehow, and that always requires some process that increases entropy (like burning something, or letting water evaporate in the case of the bird).  In any closed system the entropy eventually reaches its maximum and then there are no more temperature differentials and no more heat that can be used to do work.

Re: Tesla's heat engine (split from DDWFTTW)
Reply #71
Quote from: spork
I can assure you that you won't be banned here for your views on perpetual motion.  In fact I don't know that there's anything you could ever do or say to get banned from Talkrational.  Don't worry about taboo or policy.  Just make your case.

Right, and that from the guy who just finished calling me an idiot/retard...

Why lie about things that we can see here in black and white!?

Now I'm a liar as well? What have I lied about?

edit: never mind, I see now that was apparently just another insult. (That I'm a retard and it's here to see in black and white?)

Quote
Quote
...as well as a "condescending prick"? besides apologizing to everybody for having me here?

Yes - that was me.  And that says absolutely nothing about whether you would be banned here for talking about perpetual motion or anything else.  I will say again - just make your case.  You can do it while being a condescending prick or not.  But that's what it will take to convince people.

Quote
Many inventors rely on funding raised AFTER THEY HAVE A PATENT. I know from experience it is very difficult to acquire any kind of funding for this sort of endeavor. especially without patent protection. Just building a very small working prototype could take thousands of dollars and thousands of man hours.

Offering excuses for why you haven't or can't make your case is far less compelling than actually making your case.

I'm quite pleased to have the opportunity to make my case. I think I've been trying to do that. Building a working engine takes time and resources I don't have enough of at the moment to work on this full time as I'd certainly be more than happy to and have been as often as I'm able.

Quote
Quote
As yet, I don't have those kinds of resources, though I don't think you can say I haven't tried:

https://www.gofundme.com/2fsahck

Yes - I had seen that.  I had a good laugh.

You said: "You can be absolutely certain I'd do it if I believed it."

That, it seems to me is the main problem. Nobody believes its possible so nobody is willing to waste time and money on it.
  • Last Edit: October 29, 2017, 11:10:50 AM by Tom Booth

Re: Tesla's heat engine (split from DDWFTTW)
Reply #72
Yes, how to account for the "cold reservoir".  In one sense perhaps the water can be viewed as such.  The evaporation phase change (liquid to vapor) continually uses or sinks heat.  It is clear that there is a flow of heat from the surroundings into the body and a flow of heat out of the head into the wet covering, used in the phase change of the water.

I think it would be more accurate to say that there is a flow of heat not only into the body of the bird from the surroundings but also a flow of heat from the surroundings into the water moistening the birds head.

There is no such thing as a "reservoir" of some thing called cold. There is no outside source of cold being applied to the birds head, only the surrounding heat.

Re: Tesla's heat engine (split from DDWFTTW)
Reply #73
Now I'm a liar as well? What have I lied about?

Yes.  You claimed I called you an idiot/retard.  That's a lie.

Re: Tesla's heat engine (split from DDWFTTW)
Reply #74
There is no such thing as a "reservoir" of some thing called cold.

And no one ever suggested there is such a thing.