OverUnity prize money 15825 US$ total until now

[todd.hathaway]

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:OC_MPMM_Magnet_Motor

[sm0ky2]

by "perfect element" i do not mean just the conversion from electricity to heat.
that is a constant - regardless of WHICH element you use.

what i am talking about is the entire heating element (with blowing apperatus) which is transfering the heat into the working fluid.

this, if done properly, is directly proportional to surface area of the element, contacting the air moving through the device. - this is not perfect, because it does not usilize the entire surface area of the working fluid.

by adding the loop, and thus dispursing some of the heat back into an earlier section of the system you are increasing the surface area of the working fluid which is comming in contact to the heat energy you are transfering into it, virtually increasing the size of your heating element, or more appropriately, adding a secondary heating element powered by a % of the heat energy being placed into the system by the first element - without the loop, this heat energy would not be added back to the working fluid, thus giving you the (standard table) efficiency of heat transfer of this type of heating device. 

in comparison - an induction heater (similar to the ones found in new stovetops, or quartz oscillation heaters) if operated in a closed loop system, transfers heat energy into the working fluid as a much faster rate. While, this is still not the ideal system, such an induction heater would be closer to the ideal enough to show variance in the effects of the archer's loop, with a given volume / rate of flow - to demonstrate that the effects of the loop decrease infinitely down to 0, as the efficiency of the system approaches ideal.

[The Eskimo Quinn]

you said

by adding the loop, and thus dispursing some of the heat back into an earlier section of the system you are increasing the surface area of the working fluid which is comming in contact to the heat energy you are transferring into it, virtually increasing the size of your heating element,

this is the reverse of physics??? the additional loop is unheated and can therefore only add to the surface area heat loss, thus it should make the fluid colder according to physics and newton but here is what you are not seeing, this does occur, the variant is that due to the unique setup, the fluid is already hotter than ambient so even with losses still maintains most of the heat,

further neither the loop nor the mainflow chamber in any heater are considered as "the element" adding a hundred loops or any configuration to a casing does not increase any surface area of any element, only the portion which losses heat "the surface area"

I have seen some of your answers in other posts which seem reasonable, but this is clearly outside your area of understanding, as are some of the devices others discuss outside my area of expertise and in some cases even basic knowledge.

Had it not worked and not exist, the patents office would not have accepted the application. As you can see it is not complex, so is purely table calculations combined with the primary inventive step of producing 2 low pressure systems in one area and forcing a false venturi to work looped within itself, also never accomplished before.

[sm0ky2]

QUOTE::
""this is the reverse of physics??? the additional loop is unheated and can therefore only add to the surface area heat loss, thus it should make the fluid colder according to physics and newton but here is what you are not seeing, this does occur, the variant is that due to the unique setup, the fluid is already hotter than ambient so even with losses still maintains most of the heat, """

THIS IS NOT THE CASE - yes the exterior surface area of the loop does increase heat loss, but this is somewhat irrelevant.

the "surface area" i am talking about is the contact between the TWO fluids - which are at DIFFERENT TEMPERATURES.

the Hotter Fluid (in the loop) is fed back into the Cooler Fluid (in the main stream) and thuse acts as a secondary element - Adding more heat energy into the main fluid stream (energy that was obtained from the primary element, during the previous pass through the main stream, before the Fluid entered the loop)

Here's a perfect analogy of whats going on, using light as the "stream", in combination with an Archer's Loop

take a flashlight, and turn it on so that the light is directed into a focused beam , onto a photo-sensitive transistor array (used to detect the ammount of light energy obtained from the flashlight).

Now, there is a direct correlation between the Electrical energy output from the batteries and the Light energy obtained at the output of the flashlight. This produces a set scale, that does not change for that particular device.
x ammount of electricity = y ammount of light.  Oh, but what is this? the Archer's loop increases the ammout of light output!!!!  - or does it?

Take a set or mirrors, reflect a portion the light back, to a spot further "upstream", then reflect it back semi-parallel to the flashlight output, such that it is directed onto the photosensitive array.

after a time constant of "charging" ( approx. 0.021 microseconds in this case) the intensity of light from the flashlight is increased from what it was without the loop.  It appears "brighter", and thus you will get an increased resistance across the array, resulting in a greater radiant flux reading on the output of your light sensor.

I hope this helps you understand how the process is working with the Archer's Loop.

                                                                                   Sm0ky

[The Eskimo Quinn]

now that you have clarified the fluid rather than the loop itself as a secondary heating source, on that point I agree, but the heat gained from that is also lost at the same time. I'll explain.

The heat is gained because the element does not have to heat all the fluid from ambient because of the loop giving it excess power after achieving the element's previous maximum temp to fluid output, thus the speed or temp can be increased by the amount that is saved.

What you are referring to does happen but is also lost, so is not part of the equation, unlike the light, the light is not lessend or made weaker when it comes in contact with the other light, in fact greater energy from heat of the brighter light is gained. Wherein the hotter fluid from the loop does serve to heat the ambient fluid, the ambient also sinks the heat from the loop fluid.

your analogy although incorrect in regard to light (yet still a good way of putting your case) is in fact correct, yet not correct science for determining the source of the additional power, which is the original element not working at full capacity to get to the original max temp, therefore the element when working at full capacity has no choice but to apply that difference to the fluid.

You understand the loop and how it works, but for scientific expalanation you are describing what has happend or is happening, not the point of origin and why. which may seem like the same thing but is not. at the end of the day you understand what is happening, and most importantly that it does indeed work.

Now that may not seem like much to most, but it was noted in discussions with the patent office that it did qualify as an inventive step.

Now I'll note this again for persons not familiar with patents.

NB: very fewinventions in history qualify for recognition for an inventive step. Inventive step does not mean new invention that someone else has never thought of, that term is "Novel" the term inventive step means that "An Engineer in that chosen field would not easily believe that it works or understand how it works from a description"

Point in case, the firm for whom I designed and built the first accelerator had tow electrical engineers and one mechanical engineer, specific to the heating industry, one in his 50's and one in his 60's neither belied Zit could be done, and even to this day both still scratch their heads that it works after rebuilding it themselves and doing the tests with and without the loop. In fact one is still adamant that it shouldn't (clearly another believer who misunderstands that Newton was just another man and not God)

My point is albeit that you arrived at it in a roundabout way, you understand what many engineers do not.