A SIMPLE ELECTRIC HEATER, WHICH HAS EFFICIENCY GREATER THAN 1

[George1]

To sm0ky2.
===================
Hi sm0ky2,
Thank you for your two replies.
----------------------------------
1) Well, I will check whether the related value is 11.83 J or roughly 11 J as you say. But even if it is roughly 11 J, then the final result value will be practically the same. (The final result value will be actually a little smaller.) But anyway thank you for your valuable remark. 
2) If the water-splitting electrolysis process takes place within a period of 1 second, then the current and the Ohmic resistance remain practically constant.
3) But yes, you are absolutely right, that if the water-splitting electrolysis process takes place within a period of, let's say, many hours without any interrruptions for example, then current decreases over time and Ohmic resistance increases over time. But this problem can be easily solved by simply adding pure water in the electrolyte. (Please have a look at our post of May 01, 2021, 11:48:47 AM, in which it is clearly explained that: ".......Constant pure water and cooling agent supply could keep constant the electrolyte's temperature, heat exchange, mass and ohmic resistance, respectively........". Please consider carefully and thoroughly our post of May 01, 2021, 11:48:47 AM, if you like.)
---------------------------------
Looking forward to your answer.         

[George1]

To sm0ky2.
====================
I would like to thank you again for your last two constructive and valuable comments. Hope that we could work together and co-operate.
Looking forward to your answer.

[sm0ky2]

It cannot be exactly your 11.83J
Because there are other (minescule) energies emitting
often in RF, light (visible and otherwise), EM, etc.
Calorically all of these add up to our theoretical thermal value.


Do not forget, the reason changes in R become noticeable over time
Is because the molar count of water changes, as does concentration
of electrolyte. Even over 1 second of time this value can be calculated.


The hydronium and hydrogen ions carry their own electric charge and subsequently
moving fields, the mathematics on this become quite complex but can be reduced to
convection transforms which we do anyways to determine the thermal flow during combustion.
This can be controlled experimentally with an applied external electric field to obtain more
observable thermal conduction.


A more simplified experiment with similar results would be an arc-welder.
(or a spark gap to a thermally conductive plate and appropriate sensor)
We see experimentally the same thermal results even by omitting the extra steps.


In open air, hydrogen will (over several seconds) burn around 10,000F
An equivalent sustained spark will do the same.


Clausius isn't going to roll in his grave over this issue.

[George1]

To sm0ky2.
======================
Hi sm0ky2,
But you are not reading my posts, dear colleague! Please read carefully an thoroughly again (and many times, if necessary) our two posts of July 21, 2021, 01:35:10 PM and of July 22, 2021, 12:32:49 PM.
---------------------------------------
But it's ok, let us start from the very beginning again. Please answer the four questions below.
---------------------------------------
1) Do you accept the validity of the first Joule's law of heating (experimentally proved millions of times within a period of 200 years for any standard solid, liquid or gaseous conductor)? Yes or no? (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
2) Do you accept the validity of the first Faraday's law of electrolysis (experimentally proved millions of times within a period of 200 years for any standard electrolyte)? Yes or no? (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
3) Do you accept the validity of the value of the hydrogen's HHV (experimentally proved millions of times within a period of 200 years). Yes or no? (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
4) Do you accept the validity of the simple obvious fact that while electrolysis takes place "...constant pure water and cooling agent supply could keep constant the electrolyte's temperature, heat exchange, mass and ohmic resistance, respectively..."? Yes or no? (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
----------------------------------------
Looking forward to your four answers.

     

[George1]

To sm0ky2 (and to all other colleagues, who are interested in this topic).
======================
Please read carefully an thoroughly (and many times, if necessary) our two posts of July 21, 2021, 01:35:10 PM and of July 22, 2021, 12:32:49 PM.
---------------------------------------
Please answer the four questions below.
---------------------------------------
1) Do you accept the validity of the first Joule's law of heating (experimentally proved millions of times within a period of 200 years for any standard solid, liquid or gaseous conductor)? Yes or no? (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
2) Do you accept the validity of the first Faraday's law of electrolysis (experimentally proved millions of times within a period of 200 years for any standard electrolyte)? Yes or no? (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
3) Do you accept the validity of the value of the hydrogen's HHV (experimentally proved millions of times within a period of 200 years). Yes or no? (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
4) Do you accept the validity of the simple obvious fact that while electrolysis takes place "...constant pure water and cooling agent supply could keep constant the electrolyte's temperature, heat exchange, mass and ohmic resistance, respectively..."? Yes or no? (Only one word -- either "yes" or "no"!)
----------------------------------------
Looking forward to your four answers.