I'm still waiting to see that done.Tommy wrote:Simultaneous cooling and compression.
They haven't shown how to save all the heat from a compressor, or proven they can do it.
There are patents. Maybe in there they show the mythical contraption.
.
I'm still waiting to see that done.Tommy wrote:Simultaneous cooling and compression.
Now it's a "mythical contraption"?
Your "original comment" is based on your infatuation with obsolete 1820's caloric theory nonsense.
It sure is. LOLTom Booth wrote:Now it's a "mythical contraption"?
Temperature difference is your energy source. Temperature difference allows heat to flow into an engine. Heat is not something, it is a description of how external energy moves into internal energy.Tommy wrote:Heat is your energy source. You imagine there is some advantage to throwing it away. Not!
Tom Booth wrote:The heat isn't "thrown away". It's used to expand the cold air, to lift and circulate the water.
Your kind of stupidity, ignorance and 1820's limited "that's impossible" mindset is what sinks this and every other kind of startup, invention or stepping stone of human progress, killing the baby in in the cradle.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.massli ... utType=ampA Flooid power plant is not dependent on fossil fuels, sunlight or wind...
It works by pulling heat from the air and then converting it into electricity.
“There’s an enormous amount of energy right here in the air. People don’t realize it,” he said.
...Air from the atmosphere is compressed, and heat generated by the compressors is sent to the heat pumps and converted into electricity.
...
Maynard came up with the idea of what would become the Flooid system in 2012-13, and even he didn’t think it would work.
“I thought that I was wrong,” he said.
The numbers for his projections did not seem possible, and there was no shortage of experts willing to tell him so.
“I spent four years talking to thermodynamic experts, physicists at MIT, the University of Massachusetts, Syracuse University and a few others. Nobody got it,” he said.
It wasn’t until Jon McGowan, a professor of mechanical and industrial engineering at the University of Massachusetts, reviewed the numbers that anyone said it was possible, he said.
McGowan, he said, “actually sat down for three weeks and did the math and said, ‘Holy crap!’”
...
They say it has already been tested and proven.VincentG wrote: ↑Thu Nov 21, 2024 5:30 pm It's a clever pitch but I think it's dead on arrival.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJHrr21UvY8
The pressure of the water column is not due to the volume of the water in the column. It's only due to the height of the column. It looks to be a good way to heat air with a fluid, but not much else, unless there's some magic I'm missing.They say it has already been tested and proven.
I'm not sure what point your trying to make.
We are well beyond proof-of-concept, have a contract in place with Holyoke Gas & Electric (hged.com) and unimpeachable, 3rd-party technical validation. All 32 claims of a recent patent application affirmed by PCT.
This maybe:VincentG wrote: ↑Thu Nov 21, 2024 5:55 pmThe pressure of the water column is not due to the volume of the water in the column. It's only due to the height of the column. It looks to be a good way to heat air with a fluid, but not much else, unless there's some magic I'm missing.They say it has already been tested and proven.
I'm not sure what point your trying to make.