The advice of a physicist

Tips, advice and tips to lower your consumption, processes or inventions as unconventional engines: the Stirling engine, for example. Patents improving combustion: water injection plasma treatment, ionization of the fuel or oxidizer.
User avatar
Misterloxo
Éconologue good!
Éconologue good!
posts: 480
Registration: 10/02/03, 15:28
x 1




by Misterloxo » 18/09/06, 13:14

I agree with Targol,

Paldeo you say interesting things but I have the impression that you are offended for nothing.


Come back to see us when you are a little calmed please. But come back;)
0 x
Learning disobedience is a long process. It takes a lifetime to reach perfection. "Maurice Rajsfus
To think is to say no. "Alain, philosopher
User avatar
Cuicui
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 3547
Registration: 26/04/05, 10:14
x 6




by Cuicui » 18/09/06, 13:48

FrançoisB wrote:I believe that if a researcher invented a unitary device or one which makes it possible to reduce gasoline consumption, he would find the means to publicize his invention and to market it.
François

Talking about our beliefs is good, but does it make a difference?
0 x
User avatar
Woodcutter
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 4731
Registration: 07/11/05, 10:45
Location: Mountain ... (Trièves)
x 2

Re: The opinion of a physicist




by Woodcutter » 18/09/06, 14:59

FrançoisB wrote:[...] On the other hand I was very disappointed when I went through the sections "Tips for consuming less and special engines" and "Engines or surunitary processes, debate and ideas?". First, the surunitaire, I understand that the majority of people do not believe in it, and that's good! It's completely crazy!
Why disappointed? :|
Ce forum is not the media organ responsible for propaganda emanating from a sect of dangerous terrorists, it is a site for the exchange of ideas ...

There are a lot of things I don't believe in! If I find that in a post in which I participate, I say it and we discuss with the person who believes in it (when possible ... : roll:) otherwise I will not read the topics and that's it!


FrançoisB wrote:[..] I would have explained well why one will never be able to draw nothing from the energy of the vacuum, and why the superunitary technologies will remain only urban legends, but unfortunately do not have much time to argue on all the things that I think is misunderstood here.
This is very pedantic!
If you think you have sufficient knowledge to explain things that have not been understood here, you do it!
Or you close it ... : Mrgreen:

FrançoisB wrote:I only flew over your discussions very quickly, I may be wrong about the operation and performance of the gadgets we are talking about here, but I have the impression that several people base their beliefs in urban legends.
Very bad point for you!
We do not base a firm impression like the one you express just on an "overview" of discussions ...

It is always interesting to have opinions from highly qualified people in a field (you saw, I pass you the brush to shine there ...) but it is necessary that these show a minimum of openness.
Furthermore, since you are a scientist, show the rigor: discuss, refute, explain and argue on specific points, not on an overall impression left by a quick read ...

Having said that: Welcome to this Forum ! : Wink:



PS: Christophe, for Paldeolien you know my opinion => that he goes away, it will not be a big loss ... : Mrgreen:
0 x
Targol
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 1897
Registration: 04/05/06, 16:49
Location: Bordeaux region
x 2

Re: The opinion of a physicist




by Targol » 18/09/06, 15:13

Woodcutter wrote:If you think you have sufficient knowledge to explain things that have not been understood here, you do it!
Or you close it ... : Mrgreen:


.
"Mister I know everything", it pulule on the net, of which argue and which explain, it is already much rarer.
0 x
"Anyone who believes that exponential growth can continue indefinitely in a finite world is a fool, or an economist." KEBoulding
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79111
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972

Re: The opinion of a physicist




by Christophe » 18/09/06, 15:39

Woodcutter wrote:This is very pedantic!
If you think you have sufficient knowledge to explain things that have not been understood here, you do it!
Or you close it ... : Mrgreen:


+2 : Cheesy:

I would add that his explanations here:
https://www.econologie.com/forums/les-plans- ... 85-21.html
were FAR from being convincing but he must not have seen that we were in the subject "Humor" ...
0 x
Other
Pantone engine Researcher
Pantone engine Researcher
posts: 3787
Registration: 17/03/05, 02:35
x 12




by Other » 18/09/06, 16:35

Hello Francois

Andre wrote:
(...)
and if you want to see an engine gasoline that works on (heating oil) I can make you turn it.


I already drove with heating oil after a diesel outage. Chemically, it's pretty much the same as diesel.

I see that you fly over again when you read, go down to our altitude you can no longer see anything at the height that you are flying ..
The engine I am talking to you about is not a diesel, it is a snowblower gasoline engine, run your car on diesel fuel you will tell me if it is so easy!
it is by answers like this that I ask myself the questions about your titles of nobility.
Do you think that did not know that diesels work red furnace? we have known how to whitewash it for a long time and we have been walking on a french fries potato that is commonplace in our editing.

Obviously I keep some details for the physicist
and many other montages (I'm not very young anymore)
The same small engine tinkering in a garage floor it works with drain oil as fuel, and that without smoke.
But it takes more than that to amaze me ..
Obviously to run a combustion engine with heavy fuel I already saw this too when the pump attendant at the airport put jet B instead of 100ll in an airplane it flew more than an hour like that but at the 'arrived the engine was very adventurous.
The way you approach the topics does not match the well educated people I know. He also comes from Montreal, I know a Doctor in electricity and he is always very interested to talk about my (DIY) and give me conciels, however he is not manual, but he has lived ...
it is true that on a forum and even when home there are a lot of things to take with tweezers, I learned it at my expense (the nickel rod in the reactor which made me go around the specialized warehouses of Longueil and the price!) the surunitaire I'm not closed but I do like you I fly over, without believing too much, I take what interests me on the forum and I never disparage DIY enthusiasts.
I am part of chapter 415 EEA in St-Hubert of aircraft manufacturers and we are almost all handymen there are also engineers and all kinds of people, cohabited very well .. And our planes are more efficient than cessna 150 made by engineers ...
I make these montages for fun, neither for money nor for glory. The forum my license to communicate with interesting people who do the same thing as me ..

For the tension between the web and Paldoelien! , I think it is of no interest on the forum neither informative nor constructive, make this exchange by private message, it begins to border on indecency this dialogue ...
I even think that we should cross out this post which teaches us not much.
Everyone is free to go to the forumto read or write while respecting the rules described at the entrance to the forum


the physicist taught us what to date? , that have and garage bottom DIYers, and it's true! I never thought I was an inventor, I just want to remain a curious visionary and improve where it is possible.

François, bring something to the forum as for example on the cavity or that makes the vapor in an engine what is the admissible quantity ect .. your knowledge could interest us,
we who have their hands buttered in the pistons to the glued segment, the fingers heat by TIG welding, but we like that! and we do it for fun, it's very different from doing research with a whole protocol for a boss.
When you have an idea, you have to break your head to know how you are going to build it with the means and materials available, (a bar of inconel or tungtene is something for a handyman of the find and pay her a 20 foot bar to get a 12 inch piece)
In your lab you draw the shapes you want no matter the price it is always executable even if you have to machine the piece in a block, for us the realizations are very different,
just adapting an industrial ionization system to an assembly.
panton ..
I think I have written enough on the subject. my address is on forum and you are 70km from my house at the end of highway 30, you can contact me for an exchange of ideas, but not like the one you have on the forum , I am only interested in what advances my experiences.

Andre
0 x
User avatar
elephant
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6646
Registration: 28/07/06, 21:25
Location: Charleroi, center of the world ....
x 7




by elephant » 18/09/06, 17:35

Bravo André!

François, after such a moral lesson, you no longer have a choice: you spend all your evenings and all your weekends finding something new! :D

We are nice: we leave you the choice of weapons! : Cheesy:
0 x
elephant Supreme Honorary éconologue PCQ ..... I'm too cautious, not rich enough and too lazy to really save the CO2! http://www.caroloo.be
denis
Grand Econologue
Grand Econologue
posts: 944
Registration: 15/12/05, 17:26
Location: rhone alps
x 2




by denis » 18/09/06, 22:51

it would not be to win that 1% : Cheesy:
0 x
White would not exist without the dark, but anyway!


http://maison-en-paille.blogspot.fr/
francoisb
I discovered econologic
I discovered econologic
posts: 6
Registration: 17/09/06, 08:50
Location: Canada




by francoisb » 19/09/06, 01:18

Christophe wrote:
FrançoisB wrote:I do not know the performance of the pantone engine, but I refer you here;

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moteur_Pantone#Controverse

Do you believe that wikipedia is controlled by the oil companies? If this engine were so efficient, there would be a lot of money to be made by those who sell it and who integrate it into the cars they sell. Big companies could not miss this.


1) I'm not going to get into your controversy but have you only downloaded and READ the various study reports that have been done on this subject ... I think not and you are content with info (which suits you) gleaned here and there ... but nothing serious ...

Frankly for a physicist taking his references on wiki it's a bit light no


Indeed, the wikipedia is not a reference. In the passages that I didn't like, I didn't necessarily think about what concerns the Pantone.

Christophe, it's practically impossible for the industry not to use a process they could integrate into their cars to increase their performance, unless something prevents them from doing so. I don't believe in the oil lobby. Another reason must be found. Something, why can't they put it in the hands of everyone? Maybe, for example, it's complicated because the user has to add water? Find what puts manufacturers off and find solutions! If your process saves 10 to 30%, imagine what well-funded engineers could achieve in the auto manufacturers' research centers! Above all, imagine what you would have done for the environment! Kyoto would be much easier to reach thanks to you! Stop saving your few euros a year and save everyone (except the oil companies) money! You can be proud to have changed the world and helped your neighbor!

You write the limits of validity of the measurements yourself on the article that you site. It should really be tested in real conditions. I don't think the measurement is wrong.

Woodcutter wrote:
FrançoisB wrote:[...] On the other hand I was very disappointed when I went through the sections "Tips for consuming less and special engines" and "Engines or surunitary processes, debate and ideas?". First, the surunitaire, I understand that the majority of people do not believe in it, and that's good! It's completely crazy!
Why disappointed? :|
Ce forum is not the media organ responsible for propaganda emanating from a sect of dangerous terrorists, it is a site for the exchange of ideas ...

There are a lot of things I don't believe in! If I find that in a post in which I participate, I say it and we discuss with the person who believes in it (when possible ... : roll:) otherwise I will not read the topics and that's it!


Disappointed because I believe that there are things to be done in ecology. Now the psedo-science of superunitary engines, that makes ecology fall into the cliché of the Peace & love hippie who wants to solve the world's problems through positive thinking and the supernatural.

Woodcutter wrote:
FrançoisB wrote:[..] I would have explained well why one will never be able to draw nothing from the energy of the vacuum, and why the superunitary technologies will remain only urban legends, but unfortunately do not have much time to argue on all the things that I think is misunderstood here.
This is very pedantic!
If you think you have sufficient knowledge to explain things that have not been understood here, you do it!
Or you close it ... : Mrgreen:



I did not say that the previous Pantone does not work. On the other hand, as regards the surunitaire, I affirm it.

The physical principle that says that is not easy to explain without equations. I start with the easy explanation, then I will try to find a more understandable explanation.

The easy:

Carnot's principle prohibits it. It takes a chapter of a book to have the rigorous demonstration but there is a summary here (I know, wikipedia is not the supreme truth but I have the same conclusion in my books):

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cycle_de_Carnot

The important line is this:
Image so to get a 100% yield, Image be equal to 0 so that Tf is equal to 0K or -273,15 ° C.

Basically, it says that a unitary process would only be possible at -273 degrees C. The equation allows a unitary yield only at a lower temperature. However, a lower temperature is absolutely prohibited by physics. If necessary, this temperature is called absolute zero.

This law is verified. It is possible that it is modified for certain special cases such as for example in the case where an engine goes at a speed comparable to that of light or even at pressures of the order of those which are in the center of the Sun. On the other hand, under the conditions achievable on Earth, it will always hold.

If you do not like the equations, I will try to give you a different argument:

First define work as the energy expended by a force to produce a displacement. When we talk about an engine, we want a displacement, whether rotary or otherwise.

A job has the same units as energy. From a certain amount of energy (which can be in chemical form in petrol or electric in a battery), we can only convert this energy into work and into other forms of energy. In any conversion made at a temperature that is physically possible to reach on Earth, there are losses. That is to say that part of the energy is transformed into heat if there is friction (in the air or between two rooms) or even into sound energy. These losses mean that we have not transformed all of our energy into the new form of energy. This new form of targeted energy can be movement energy (moving a car forward) or electric energy (recharging the battery that powers the generator).


From what I have seen, some are relying on free energy to break this law. I believe that what you call free energy is what is called quantum vacuum fluctuations. It is a very low energy that is found everywhere, not just in a vacuum. It is caused by accidents in nature that create pairs of particles all over the place from nothing. These particles recombine immediately giving back their original "nothing". Aside from the fact that this energy is very low per unit of volume, it can produce force but no work. It's like the horizontal road when you drop your car on it: It forces to prevent your car from stalling, but you cannot get work (energy) from the road to move your car because this force does not produce of displacement.

Surunitary is impossible in the sense that it is proven that it cannot be. It's not like the existence of aliens whose impossibility cannot be scientifically proven

André,

You have to be careful not to pollute more than you would have done with regular fuel. Various oils and the engines of small machines can pollute enormously.



elephant wrote: François, after such a moral lesson, you no longer have a choice: you spend all your evenings and all your weekends finding something new! :D
.

I temporarily gave up research in ecology - energy until I graduated. I already spend my days looking for something new and that is enough for me.

I think I have used up my time forum this week, I will come back to you in a few days if there is an answer.

Until then, be well,

François
0 x
Other
Pantone engine Researcher
Pantone engine Researcher
posts: 3787
Registration: 17/03/05, 02:35
x 12




by Other » 19/09/06, 03:20

Hello
Christophe, it's practically impossible for the industry not to use a process that they could integrate into their cars to increase their performance, unless something prevents them from doing so. I don't believe in the oil lobby. Another reason must be found. Something, why can't they put it in the hands of everyone? Maybe, for example, it's complicated because the user has to add water? Find what puts manufacturers off and find solutions! If your process saves 10 to 30%


If engineers are able to install a bazard like the ERG valve they are able to install a pant or a steam injection, which is clearly superior to the ERG valve. It has been 2 years since on my Chevrolet lumina van I disconnected it to make my panton entry and the candles are white like milk and oil at 5000km it looks like I have just changed it.
with a Van Lumina, you try to descend to Sherbrook go back by driving at 100kmh and make 7,2 liters per 100km ...
if we look at certain mechanical aberence like an ERG valve on a diesel engine I have serious doubts about the work that is being done in research.
Many garages, on the diesel discreetly block the small conduit to vaccine with a blow of soldering iron and hello ERG!

As I am in the field of aviation, when I see the choice of propellers that engineers impose on us on seaplanes it is absurd, we see that they are seated in an office and not seated on the plane when it takes off loaded on a small lake it is not them which crash in the spruce trees (the I move away from the subject as long as being in the bullshit of standards that we are imposed on.
As far as pollution is concerned, I'm not a pure green, but having worked for years in PCBs and all kinds of solvents, I know very well that using drain oil in an experimental engine does pollutes, no need to measure. but it's an experience, which burns just 1 liter, (the rose garden of Drumonville heats its greenhouses only with that, did you know that? then my little liter for experimentation is little beer)
You know like me that in Quebec we do not pass annual tests for pollution and that many old cars if you go to bed below in place of the catalyst there is a piece of pipe and as if by chance the lengths that are in the Canadian tire rack fits like a glove in place of the catalyst, you don't even have to cut it.
The only thing I measure is consumption and autonomy
the temperature of the exhaust gases and directly linked to the efficiency of the engines, a cold engine in power gives a good performance. I have no instrument to measure the pollution, but in my simplistic reasoning if I halve the consumption I should decrease the pollution a little
You will not make me believe you too that a polished mower more than a big MACK truck .. he burns 50 liters of diesel in an hour and the mower 0,6 liters of petrol with good Klotz oil (castor oil)

Let the surunitaire for those watch dreaming, history give us some Jules Vernes ect .. and in the end that force us to seek and through that there are interesting things that have been useful for other use.

with your knowledge you have not told us what a certain% of water vapor does in a diesel or combustion engine, I don't know! I can have an idea an impression, but that is hypothesis, I just measure the results and I adjust myself..and I am stuck below 30% and it does not impress me at all ..

Your boss do you know that you're going to troll on forums ? those who work in research, that I know occasionally watch on forum but never get involved, it is not recommended, even those who work on Turbine research at Pratt do not put the pains on the forums, it's risky for their job ... Unless you are still on the school benches ..


Andre

Edit: I am also testing the ionization on this Chevrolet Lumina

test-and-ionization-Chevrolet-lumina-pic177.jpg
0 x

Back to "Special motors, patents, fuel consumption reduction"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 125 guests