A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1

[George1]

To lancaIV.
-----------------------
Hi lancaIV,
Hi dear colleague,
1) Where did you disappear, my friend? You haven't sent interesting links for a long time.
2) And what is your opinion about the two posts of July 21, 2018, 02:11:37 PM and May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM from the topic "IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?"? Zigzags imitate resistance, identical to friction, but without generating heat, don't they?
Looking forward to your answer.
George     

[George1]

Hi lancaIV,
Where are you, my friend? You haven't sent interesting posts for a long time.
Regards,
George

[George1]

Hi guys,
Please have a look at the topic "IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?".
------------------------------
1) Here is an abstract from our post from May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM. "It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0." ANY OBJECTIONS AGAINST THIS LAST CLAIM?
------------------------------
2) Because the lack of objections inevitably leads to a generation of a violation/exception of the rule/law of conservation of linear momentum. (I will remind again that any rule/law has its exceptions and there is nothing special, tragic and disturbing in this fact.)
------------------------------
3) Previous item 2 inevitably leads on its behalf to a possibility of designing and manufacturing of a reactionless drive.
------------------------------
How to explain the things in a simpler and easier manner?
George

[George1]

Hi guys,
Please have a look at the topic "IS THIS A REACTIONLESS DRIVE OR A PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE?".
------------------------------
1) Here is an abstract from our post from May 16, 2019, 09:35:12 AM. "It is evident that we can always choose a suitable combination of (a) magnitude of force of friction, (b) length of segments s and (c) number and shape of zigzags, for which Fc = F'c, Fc > 0, F'c > 0, d = d', d > 0 and d' > 0." ANY OBJECTIONS AGAINST THIS LAST CLAIM?
------------------------------
2) Because the lack of objections inevitably leads to a generation of a violation/exception of the rule/law of conservation of linear momentum. (I will remind again that any rule/law has its exceptions and there is nothing special, tragic and disturbing in this fact.)
------------------------------
3) Previous item 2 inevitably leads on its behalf to a possibility of designing and manufacturing of a reactionless drive.
------------------------------
How to explain the things in a simpler and easier manner?
George

[Floor]

The second case is false. You have simply forgotten the oxidation-reduction potentials! The potential difference that will result in heating is therefore less than the one used. This means in other words that even for the same current, the energy used for producing hydrogen is not used to heat.
If overunity were so childish, it would have been known for a long time! We'll have to be much smarter.

@George1

I am curious as to where  the energy of the oxidation-reduction potentials goes
to and in what form it then exists as ? 

I never got around to asking FLT t6FL that question.


And then returning to your actual topic....

An industrial scale electrolysis /  hydrogen gas generator could be located at the bottom of a
mountain.  Simply put.

             outputs

!. Resistive electric  heating
2. Lift from the hydrogen rising
3. burning the hydrogen, heat (at the top of the mountain).
4. falling hot water.

floor