Question of thermodynamics

[teatime]

Hello,

I just discovered a document ...
I am particularly interested in pages 20 to 23.

It is about "upstream cycle". I did not know.

This "upstream cycle" produces work without giving heat to the cold source because it restores heat not converted into work in the second cycle ...
So far, it's not new. It is known since it is a "combined cycle" ... except that there, the heat which it gives to the second cycle is at the temperature of the hot source!
Crazy!
I had never seen such a concept. I didn't know that something like this was possible.
Anyone know this stuff?

There is something else very interesting in this document: the possibility of heating a gas to a temperature higher than that of the hot source which heats the gas ...
Crazy this thing!

But that's not all, there is even better and since the two processes can be combined and further increase the thermodynamic efficiency ...

This document is incredible.

I just finished checking the calculations for the upstream cycle and I did not find an error.

Here is the link : http://monotherme.com/pdf/decouverte_th ... amique.pdf

Good reading.

[Obamot]

It is about "upstream cycle". I did not know.

When you don't "do not know", we do not put a title of misleading thread! Who would suggest an innovation that is not really one. In the compression / expansion cycle of a gas, there is respectively an increase in compression temperature and a decrease in expansion temperature ...

There is nothing new in there. Upstream cycle doesn't mean anything special ... It's just a description of an amha workflow stage.

A country like India which has unlimited solar resources, would do better to use passive thermodynamics, as with sand, which would avoid any type of external energy supply! Even thermal solar.

[teatime]

It is about "upstream cycle". I did not know.

When you don't "do not know", we do not put a title of misleading thread! Who would suggest an innovation that is not really one. .

A lower tone Obamot!

I know thermodynamics well and I affirm that it is a discovery.

If you want to prove the contrary, then prove it. You just need to give a link that is the basis of your assertion ... which is very quick and superficial.

[dedeleco]

Already presented on econology, nothing fundamentally new, and no miracle in reality !!!

This kind of imaginative thing, with paradoxes is to be put into practice in high level thermodynamics lessons, to see if the students have assimilated the course, to be able to uncover hidden errors.

It is obvious that a heat engine (operating on two heat sources, hot cold) can give a temperature higher than the hot (and even ignite) already only with Joule effect on a small brake of the engine for example, but the heat balance respects Carnot and we will not do miracles and we must be wary of errors on overly idealized cycles ( the mixture of gases with different T increases the total entropy in reality, little taught ).

exceed Carnot's performance

is a pure dream of perpetual motion, based on errors of reasoning !! (the definition of the yield is modified ad hoc !!! with lack of rigor which is found at the end violating Carnot )

Enough to waste people's time, who have misunderstood science, to realize a dream of the perpetual motion type, like many other people on the internet.

[teatime]

Already presented on econology, nothing fundamentally new, and no miracle in reality !!!

This kind of imaginative thing, with paradoxes is to be put into practice in high level thermodynamics lessons, to see if the students have assimilated the course, to be able to uncover hidden errors.

It is obvious that a heat engine (operating on two heat sources, hot cold) can give a temperature higher than the hot (and even ignite) already only with Joule effect on a small brake of the engine for example, but the heat balance respects Carnot and we will not do any miracles and we must be wary of errors on too idealized cycles (the mixture of gases with different T increases the total entropy in reality).

exceed Carnot's performance

is a pure dream of perpetual motion, based on errors of reasoning !! (the definition of the yield is modified ad hoc !!!)

Enough to waste time making people realize a dream of the perpetual motion type, like many others on the internet.

This answer is just as quick and superficial as the previous one.
Reading the document is pleasant and interesting, it makes you think ... those who like to think only ... What does not seem to be your case dedeleco.
Especially since the definition of performance is all that is CLASSIC ...
and in terms of wasting your time ... can you tell us what you use your dedeco time for?

[Obamot]

In 8 posts, Teatime is already making 2 friends

Several great discoveries in thermodynamics [...] There is question of "upstream cycle". I did not know.

When you don't "do not know", we do not put a title of misleading thread! Who would suggest an innovation that is not really one. .

A lower tone Obamot!

I know thermodynamics well and I say that it is a discovery.

If you want to prove otherwise, then prove it

- I don't say anything! It is Teatime who says to him the "burden of proof"...
- I said "in my humble opinion"(amha), does Teatime want us to lower our pants?
- I also studied thermodynamics, which is possibly innovative, it is not a discovery, but a combination in an application model, amha.

[dedeleco]

Yes, we must not forget the precise conditions of the classic definition, to be respected

Especially since the definition of performance is all that is CLASSIC ...

because otherwise the use of formulas is wrong, leading to pure dreams !!

Try to perform your Stirling (which has been done historically) to see an improved real result, but still less than Carnot !!!

Carnot is an experimental observation, it is the basic law of disorder, and all our experimental measures would be completely different in all areas, with technological miracles.

[teatime]

Several great discoveries in thermodynamics [...] There is question of "upstream cycle". I did not know.

When you don't "do not know", we do not put a title of misleading thread! Who would suggest an innovation that is not really one. .

A lower tone Obamot!

I know thermodynamics well and I say that it is a discovery.

If you want to prove otherwise, then prove it

- I don't say anything! Read again ... It is you who affirms, to you theburden of proof"...
- I said "in my humble opinion"(amha), do you want me to drop my pants?
- I also studied thermodynamics, which is possibly innovative, it is not a discovery, but a combination in an application model, amha.

Oh, for me a "discovery" it can be for example when one "discovers" that the yield is higher than what one thought possible ... quite simply.
Have you checked the calculations? No ? Well, yes ...

[Obamot]

Ok, ok since Teatime tells us that he studied thermodynamics (and that he claims that there is a "discovery" relating to the yield): can he tell us if this one concerns:
- "thermodynamic efficiency»
or
- the "Thermodynamic efficiency"?

[teatime]

Yes, we must not forget the precise conditions of the classic definition, to be respected

Especially since the definition of performance is all that is CLASSIC ...

because otherwise the use of formulas is wrong, leading to pure dreams !!

Try to perform your Stirling (which has been done historically) to see an improved real result, but still less than Carnot !!!

Carnot is an experimental observation, it is the basic law of disorder, and all our experimental measures would be completely different in all areas, with technological miracles.

Those who have studied epistemology know well that one cannot generalize particular cases ... and that the will of scientists to ignore this elementary evidence is a real HORROR ... at least for all those who authentically love the truth.