Recycling The Energy which was used in Cooling

[sparks]

   So an electron experiencing an ACCELERATING force losses mass?   Let me get this straight.   The velocity of a free electron is 1 meter per second.    The electron experiences an accelerating force and reaches a velocity of 100,000 meters per second.   It is immune to any mass gain? 

[LibreEnergia]

   So an electron experiencing an ACCELERATING force losses mass?   So let me get this straight.   The velocity of a free electron is 1 meter per second.    The electron experiences an accelerating force and reaches a velocity of 100,000 meters per second.   It is immune to any mass gain?

No, as you say it gains mass. However I was referring to your statement

"This ionization event will release the original mass gained during atomic synthesis a long long long time ago.. etc"

Ionization requires energy INPUT,  An electron bound to a nucleus has lower mass compared to when it is ionized, the exact opposite of what you are implying.

[sparks]

No, as you say it gains mass. However I was referring to your statement

"This ionization event will release the original mass gained during atomic synthesis a long long long time ago.. etc"

Ionization requires energy INPUT,  An electron bound to a nucleus has lower mass compared to when it is ionized, the exact opposite of what you are implying.

Ionization requires cancellation of the binding force only.  Has nothing to do with the electron mass gain.  The peculiar motion of the electron will determine the mass of the electron.  Simply because it is sharing a common velocity with the core does not alter it's mass.    This whole concept of electron gain in velocity simply because it is bound is horseshit.  It is the equivalent of taking a bunch of pool balls laying on a table and placing the rack on them and suddenly the pool balls start moving all on their own.

[LibreEnergia]

Ionization requires cancellation of the binding force only.  Has nothing to do with the electron mass gain.

So I take it you do not agree that bound particles have lower mass compared to when they are unbound as is generally accepted.?

In which case your paradigm will certainly give rise to free energy effects. Good luck developing a comprehensive theory based on that, but I can see a few holes developing already.

[Low-Q]

You can imagine the cold object as if it were a spring when you compress a spring you store a specific amount of energy inside it by releasing it you can get the energy which you've stored.

By extracting 1MJ of heat from a liquid it will be very cold and will contract then it will cool the surrounding environment and will absorb 1MJ of heat and expand producing 1MJ of mechanical energy we can use this mechanical energy (the energy of expansion) to cool it again for free.

And this is the main idea of the Fridge that powers itself this type of fridge  can generate a huge amount of cold forever to cool any thing.

The more we'll consume the coldness from the cold liquid the more it'll expand and produce mechanical energy.

I like this idea. However, the process of cooling and heating mass also takes into account the potential energy found in expansion and contraction. If you spend 1MJ to compress a steel spring. Now, put that compressed spring into a melting oven. The spring loose tension, and ask where the input energy goes. Is the 1MJ input energy lost or destroyed? No. As the spring loose tension, it release heat that correspond to the energy that compressed it.


The similar applies to heating an cooling a fluid. Parts of the energy goes to cooling it, and the rest goes to contracting it. To get back all the input energy, you must also get back the kinetic energy in the expansion during heating.


For a gasoline engiune, heat is a bi-product that is waste. The engine runs because of expansion of the gasous fluid. The expansion is caused by heat, but it isn't the heat that runs the engine. Heat is waste.