another small breakthrough on our NERD technology.

[Cloxxki]

@poynt99 (and others)
I would appreciate your input here. What would you regard the lowest COP that definately can be looped back with significant (let's say 1% of throughput) useful output? Especially for technology such as on topic. 1.5 , maybe even lower?
Might be worthwhile to understand what level of OU is worthwhile designing a loop system for.

Or, expressed differently, which level of OU claim should ONLY be accepted accompanied by a demonstrated loop, since it's such a doable job that there is no excuse to let that "formality" up to replicators?

[Rosemary Ainslie]

I'm going to ask the same question again but this time with a visual aid, so no one spoil it please. We want Rosemary to have first crack at it. Coming up soon, I need to draw it up.

.99

My dear Poynty,

If we were delay our claim while you scraped that barrel - then this poor little thread would truly die from want of interest.  Until you've answered my own questions - or until you make your questions a little more apposite - I'm inclined to ignore all your further posts.  Meanwhile I would remind you.  You need to 'cough up'.  I'll forward you my the paypal details as soon as you acknowledge this claim of ours.

Kindest regards,
Rosie Pose

[poynt99]

Cloxxki,

I would say a minimum COP of 2, preferably 3, with a minimum excess of 1W output.

For the OUR award, the terms require 15W minimum of continuous output above input.

.99

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Now.  The next application is to our very own academic - Professor Steven E Jones.  Could we impose on you to reply to our emails?  We are anxious to enter into some dialogue related to our over unity evidence that is detailed in our paper that I sent to you.

We believe we qualify for your overunity prize and would be glad if you could evaluate our paper as the basis of our claim.

Kindest regards,
Rosemary

[SchubertReijiMaigo]

Currently, it's the existential question that I ask to myself... 


IE: 1) You have a device with a COP of 10: Yeah the device is great !!! 
      2) BUT, your device is about only 10% efficiency about the conversion process (Friction, bad   
          coupling, Heat, Impedance mismatching, [put whatever you want here...] )   
      3) Despite your COP 10 when you try to get the juice you have only 1 since 90% of energy is wasted !!! 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


IE:  1) You have a COP of 1.5 but 90% efficiency conversion, you get: 
       2) 1.5*0.9 = 1.35...   
       3) Despite your 1.5 only COP you have 0.35 totally free, 1 to self loop, and 0.15 in losses...
           


SRM