A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1

[George1]

It's Ok. I understand. You can follow the same topic in besslerwheel.com/forum. For your convenience the greater part of the post there is given below.
========================================================
Let us assume that the energy consumed by the standard water-splitting electrolyzer is just equal to the sum of (a) the Joule's heat and (b) the heat, generated by the burning/exploding of the released hydrogen. Therefore we can write down the equality
V x I x t = (I x I x R x t) + (Z x I x t x (HHV)) (1)
where
V = DC source voltage
I = DC current
R = Ohmic resistance
t = time
Z = electrochemical equivalent of hydrogen
HHV = higher heating value of hydrogen
Therefore we can write down the inequalities
V x I x t > I x I x R x t (2) <=> V > I x R (3) <=> V/R > I (4).
-----------------------
The last inequality (4) unambiguously shows that Ohm's law is not valid for liquid resistors.
----------------------
The above considerations are not very precise however. In order to be precise enough we have to introduce the quantities v an i. In other words, we must write down the equality
(V - v) x (I - i) x t = ((I - i) x (I - i) x R x t)+(Z x (I - i) x t x (HHV)) (5)
where
V = DC source voltage
I = DC current
R = Ohmic resistance
t = time
Z = electrochemical equivalent of hydrogen
HHV = higher heating value of hydrogen
v = minimum voltage necessary for the water-splitting electrolysis to begin
i = the related small decreasing of current I, caused by the presence of v.
And from here we can write down the inequalities
(V - v) x (I - i) x t > (I - i) x (I - i) x R x t (6) <=>
<=> V - v > (I -i) x R (7) <=> (V - v)/R > I - i (.
-----------------------------------------
The last inequality ( shows again that Ohm's law is not valid for liquid resistors.
------------------------------------------
It is evident that if V is much bigger than v (and I much bigger than i, respectively), then v and i can be neglected and in this case inequality ( can be replaced with
inequality (4).
In one word, if equalities (1) and (5) are valid, then inequalities (4) and ( are valid too. But this means that Ohm's law is not valid for liquid resistors.
----------------------------------------
Ohm's law is the most basic and most fundamental axiom of electric engineering. No Ohm's law -- no electric engineering. Therefore equalities (1) and (5) are not valid and this fact confirms again the validity of our basic OU water-electrolysis-related concept, which is considered in this topic.
============================
Looking forward to your answer. 

[George1]

The yellow head with black spectacles in our previous post corresponds to number eight. (Some defect of the system obviously replaces number eight with stupid yellow head with black spectacles.)

[George1]

Any comments, any opinions related to this topic? Any objections against the validity of our water electrolysis OU concept?

[NdaClouDzzz]

Any comments, any opinions related to this topic? Any objections against the validity of our water electrolysis OU concept?

No comment on what you are presenting as I haven't studied it. However, I would like to point out the irony in regards to those who claim that free-energy tech is being suppressed.
There are those who repeatedly claim that free-energy tech is being suppressed and everyone here should be open-sourcing in order to save the world. Funny thing is that those same people can't even see the free-energy tech that's already in front of them. If people at a free-energy forum can't see it, how can we expect a world full of people with no interest in it to see it? THAT is the REAL problem that we face with free-energy tech!

[George1]

To NdaClouDzzz.
-------------------------
Dear colleague,
Thank you for your reply. But some parts of your text seem to be a little difficult for understanding. Would you be so polite to explain them in detail, if possible?
George1