Jump to content


Photo
* * * - - 3 votes

New engine


  • Please log in to reply
1377 replies to this topic

#1101 Greg Locock

Greg Locock
  • Member

  • 4,523 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 24 June 2013 - 01:45

www.sperdirect.com/anemometer-thermometer-401-prd1.htm

or


http://www.google.co...29,r:1,s:0,i:84

Advertisement

#1102 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 24 June 2013 - 10:59

www.sperdirect.com/anemometer-thermometer-401-prd1.htm

or


http://www.google.co...29,r:1,s:0,i:84


:wave: :wave:

If you want to get to any place and to measure the flow of air, you can consider having a more professional meters.

http://www2.emersonp...ages/index.aspx



http://racingtech.wo...-tube-velocity/


And here do send warm greetings to our kids playing these beautiful toys.... :wave:

Posted Image

Andrew :smoking: :smoking:

#1103 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 02 July 2013 - 21:57

I recently discovered the venturi nozzle was and is used to produce electricity ... It turns out that there where no other way of producing electricity eletrycznego probably not out of the question, and the requirements are very high, the precision and reliability, there was used for this purpose Venturi nozzle .... Although it is a microscopic nozzle, but it proves to us its great suitability for the production of electricity. This is not exactly how it should be done for the production of energy from normal wind, but it shows the desirability of using a venturi, due to its unique properties ... ...

Posted Image


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M734_fuze


Andrew :smoking: :smoking:

Edited by Feliks, 02 July 2013 - 21:59.


#1104 Greg Locock

Greg Locock
  • Member

  • 4,523 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 02 July 2013 - 23:00

The goal there is not efficiency in any shape or form. Many ludicrous geometries will generate power from wind, the problem in the real world is to do so while maximising the energy output per dollar of capital invested, or some other efficiency measure.

#1105 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 03 July 2013 - 09:58

The goal there is not efficiency in any shape or form. Many ludicrous geometries will generate power from wind, the problem in the real world is to do so while maximising the energy output per dollar of capital invested, or some other efficiency measure.



Yes, you're right .. Prblem is above price comparison of the results obtained, life insurance, ways and means of maintenance, ease of construction and even quite a few factors. It was not until all the issues included in the project will be decided .... and true innovation, is when after consideration of all the reasons tyxh answer will be yes ...
At the beginning of this innovation, there is still a problem, who has all the basic research and depending perform to get some general assumptions of a new method that can be accurately determine the costs and effectiveness in the series ..
I think it should be all usher in a new university faculties and in their laboratories. Beginnings are always difficult. ..

But the hardest is over ... .. :rolleyes:

"The Felix Pyramid" .... :rolleyes:

Posted Image


Andrew :smoking:



#1106 GodHimself

GodHimself
  • Member

  • 206 posts
  • Joined: January 13

Posted 04 July 2013 - 19:25

You are mad.

God Himself

#1107 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,305 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 04 July 2013 - 22:50

You are mad.
God Himself

It therefore came to pass.

#1108 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 07 July 2013 - 10:52

Maybe to look for a wise Pharaoh, what would your people encouraged to build these Pyramids, which for the next 4000 years will give you energy .... Because these Pharaohs, who are now, it's encouraged his people mistakenly feed of build something that even after 4000 years will be dangerous, and no power will not have long to produce .. :rolleyes:

Andrew :smoking: :smoking:

#1109 RogerGraham

RogerGraham
  • Member

  • 106 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 07 July 2013 - 11:59

This thread baffles me.

#1110 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,499 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 07 July 2013 - 12:38

This thread baffles me.

I understood that!

#1111 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,305 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 07 July 2013 - 23:40

This thread baffles me.

I know this is the technical forum but we keep this one going for entertainment.

#1112 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 08 July 2013 - 01:21

I know this is the technical forum but we keep this one going for entertainment.


Yes, the technical entertainment is watching these precise mechanisms as well get the job done ....
Here shown in the video in slow motion, which is used for making the valve at high engine speed. It behaves like a ballet dancer at the Grand Theatre. For this reason, it is just nods, not quite exactly the closed space of the cylinder, as shown in the film, as is reflected from the valve seat a few times, of course, does not give the required seal ... Considering that there are two valves, intake and exhaust, almost always either open or just a reflection of the valve seat ... The precision of the charge exchange and obtained the pressure inside the cylinder, it can be said that there is no .... ... Practically a huge part of the energy goes out, instead of being converted into work ... In addition, more than 100 years trying to improve it, but have run out of opportunities to improve the timing mechanism, which can be clearly seen in the video ... The addition of the "pitching" , valves often simply break off and fall into the cylinder. Such frequent event seen in the second movie ....
My way new4stroke timing is more precise than a Swiss watch, and of the tightness of a total of several times better than that of a conventional ... Now you can see where does this "extraordinary power" in my engine. Just a whole load of turns to work, at any engine speed, which is several times more than the conventional engine .. Just for now, most were released into the air ... I stopped and no let off ..






Andrew :lol: :lol:

Edited by Feliks, 08 July 2013 - 02:00.


#1113 RogerGraham

RogerGraham
  • Member

  • 106 posts
  • Joined: October 12

Posted 08 July 2013 - 03:02

I know this is the technical forum but we keep this one going for entertainment.


It's working!

#1114 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 11 July 2013 - 00:50

It's working!



This is apparently too ..

http://www.google.co...tents/US7908872

Andrew :smoking: :smoking:

#1115 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 11 July 2013 - 22:01

I know this is the technical forum but we keep this one going for entertainment.



I will keep the entertainment was much more.... :smoking: :smoking:

i used to sell advertising to these guys:

Posted Image
http://www.exair.com.....be Works.aspx


the product is even called a "vortex" tube. :laugh::beer: your venturi nozzles and heat flows made it pop right back into my head for some reason, over ten years later. :thumbup:

(sort of related; i also did business with vortech. that was always a more exciting call, but the technology is way too pedestrian for this thread. :cool:)


Andrew :rolleyes:

Edited by Feliks, 13 July 2013 - 23:48.


#1116 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 15 July 2013 - 02:07

Heating and cooling of a house nozzle Vortex. Two such nozzle biggest deal, give as much energy as the average air conditioner ..

Very easy and safe collection of compressed air, as long it allows to store and recover all the energy that we put ... up to two weeks, we can not fill the tank, just use what they retain ... Just the time to wait for good weather for power ..

air tanks filled with green energy, electricity or diesel ... 100% of efficiency ...

Posted Image

Andrew :smoking: :smoking:


#1117 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 16 July 2013 - 23:43

Glider, is such that 3 m ^ 2 front surface ... ... windmill, which is 3 m ^ 2 has a diameter of about 2 meters .... of such a windmill, at a wind speed of 75 km / h, we get only around 500 watts of power. Now I do imagine that the 500 watt would raise a 500 kG glider at the height of 12 km in the Alps ....
You can see in this example, the energy is much more than that due to the "Law Betz"

Now, we can see that the glider is perfectly shaped, which makes it a true cross-section of recognition, drag, only 10% of the actual resistance of the cross-sectional plane ... or power that diligently received the windmill of the size is just ... about 20 watt .. And this power is expected to be a glider at the height of 12 km?

http://www.aeroklub....p...e&Itemid=69

Posted Image

Andrew :smoking: :smoking:

Edited by Feliks, 17 July 2013 - 09:50.


#1118 Greg Locock

Greg Locock
  • Member

  • 4,523 posts
  • Joined: March 03

Posted 17 July 2013 - 01:48

but a glider is not generating power from the wind, it is just falling down in a very satisfying fashion.

500kg glider at 100 kph at 50:1 glide slope is 500*10/50*~30 or about 3 kW.

#1119 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 17 July 2013 - 09:35

but a glider is not generating power from the wind, it is just falling down in a very satisfying fashion.

500kg glider at 100 kph at 50:1 glide slope is 500*10/50*~30 or about 3 kW.



Yes? interesting how the energy raises the height of the glider 12 km? Maybe it's some "Perpetual Motion:? Maybe magnetism moonlight?

Andrew :smoking:

Advertisement

#1120 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,499 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 17 July 2013 - 10:43

Yes? interesting how the energy raises the height of the glider 12 km? Maybe it's some "Perpetual Motion:? Maybe magnetism moonlight?

Andrew :smoking:

Thermals. If the air is going up, the glider goes with it, but it is still 'falling' relative to the air.

#1121 manolis

manolis
  • Member

  • 377 posts
  • Joined: May 03

Posted 17 July 2013 - 11:15

An eagle was making rounds above the slope of a big mountain, keeping its wings completely immovable.
Without moving its wings, the eagle was gaining a lot of height in every round.
After 3 minutes of rounds, the eagle could not be seen from the ground any longer.


When the temperature of the ground is adequately high (say at the noon of a sunny windless day), the air near the ground warms.
The hot air is thinner and lighter.
The lighter air starts moving upwards just like a balloon full of hot air goes upwards, as Archimedes predicted.

Who gave the energy to the eagle?
The sun did.
The sun warms the ground, the ground warms the air, the air moves upwards, the upward moving air stream provides energy to the wings of the eagle, the eagle gains height, the dynamic energy of the eagle increases.

Just like the eagle, the pilot of a glider has to find the upwardly moving streams of air and exploit them.

The glider of Greg Locock (post 1118) has a falling rate of 0.5m/sec in a standstill air.
If this glider moves into an upwardly moving stream of air and the upward velocity of the air stream is 1m/sec (3.6Km/h), then the glider gains 0.5m/sec or 1.8Km/h, i.e. it needs nearly 7 hours to go to 12Km altitude. With 4m/sec (14.4 Km/h) upward velocity of the air stream, the glider goes at 12Km altitude in an hour.

Thanks
Manolis Pattakos

#1122 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 17 July 2013 - 11:29

Thermals. If the air is going up, the glider goes with it, but it is still 'falling' relative to the air.


Yes Tony .. glider looking for thermals in the traditional flying near the airport ... But at 12 km thermals have long gone ... It is only a strong wind over the mountains, and it allows you to rise to such a height ... for the sole blowing in the wind over the mountains .... at say 10 km. It is then elstremalne flying ...

Andrew :smoking: :smoking:

#1123 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 17 July 2013 - 11:51

Well, here even at the airport, it is clear from the wind flowing around the glider with a huge rate increases that 500 KG top ... Only the wind ...





Andrew :smoking: :smoking:

#1124 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 18 July 2013 - 19:45

What is the "Wave"? This is a wave that arises from the mountains of streaming in the wind ..

http://www.youtube.c...ature=endscreen

http://www.youtube.c...c...A-Iico&NR=1

http://www.youtube.c...p;v=yIsd2vxokyc

Andrew :smoking: :smoking:

Edited by Feliks, 18 July 2013 - 20:27.


#1125 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 22 July 2013 - 09:06

An eagle was making rounds above the slope of a big mountain, keeping its wings completely immovable.
Without moving its wings, the eagle was gaining a lot of height in every round.
After 3 minutes of rounds, the eagle could not be seen from the ground any longer.


When the temperature of the ground is adequately high (say at the noon of a sunny windless day), the air near the ground warms.
The hot air is thinner and lighter.
The lighter air starts moving upwards just like a balloon full of hot air goes upwards, as Archimedes predicted.

Who gave the energy to the eagle?
The sun did.
The sun warms the ground, the ground warms the air, the air moves upwards, the upward moving air stream provides energy to the wings of the eagle, the eagle gains height, the dynamic energy of the eagle increases.

Just like the eagle, the pilot of a glider has to find the upwardly moving streams of air and exploit them.

The glider of Greg Locock (post 1118) has a falling rate of 0.5m/sec in a standstill air.
If this glider moves into an upwardly moving stream of air and the upward velocity of the air stream is 1m/sec (3.6Km/h), then the glider gains 0.5m/sec or 1.8Km/h, i.e. it needs nearly 7 hours to go to 12Km altitude. With 4m/sec (14.4 Km/h) upward velocity of the air stream, the glider goes at 12Km altitude in an hour.

Thanks
Manolis Pattakos


Thank you for a good reference to the nature Manolis. Indeed gliders are flying mostly as predicted great Greek explorer, unknown at the time depending on physical, Archimedes. If it comes to nature, and is also interesting is the case of flight bumblebee, its weight and the ability to fly ..
These data complement gliders climb rate, giving the results of the fuel consumption per cycle climb glider winch manufacturers define the 0.3 KG fuel.


Taking the opportunity, I would like to thank the public, Mr. Manolis Pattakos, beautiful animation made ​​for my engine new4stroke, articulating in a professional manner important advantages of my design. Only a man with extensive experience and technical drawing so nice animations could create.
Only the blood having a wonderful continuation of the Greek idea of ​​their great inventors, he could appreciate my design, which he inventor, and completely free of charge, to perform for me this wonderful animation, which will call again.
Posted Image


Andrew :wave:

Edited by Feliks, 22 July 2013 - 09:10.


#1126 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,305 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 22 July 2013 - 22:50

Very generous! Congratulations Manolis and Andrew.

#1127 malbear

malbear
  • Member

  • 243 posts
  • Joined: September 02

Posted 23 July 2013 - 07:57

Very generous! Congratulations Manolis and Andrew.

most excellent hear hear :clap:

#1128 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 24 July 2013 - 12:18

Very generous! Congratulations Manolis and Andrew.



A generous, because the animation is also plentiful .. A reward may be the only such thanks .. that teeth have a chance to make, it took a few years, which multiplied the gratitude ... and Archimedes, announced their discoveries, as yet there was no Patent Office. .. :rolleyes:

Andrew :smoking: :smoking:

http://futureairline...to-phase-2.html

#1129 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 25 July 2013 - 00:27

for the moment sufficient to Savoir-vivre.. :rolleyes:

glider Jantar 1

maiden flight: 13.05.1972

wingspan: 19 m

wing profile: Fx-67 K-170 > Fx-67 K-150

own weight: 295 (+3) kg

total weight: 417 kg /515 kg (with the ballast)

The load area: 27,7 kG/m²/34,2 kG/m² (with the ballast)

excellence: 47 przy 95 km/h

the rate of descent: 0,50 m/s przy 75 km/h

minimum speed.: 60 km/h

Speed ​​limit(Vne): 245 (230 with the ballast) km/h

Winch pulls the glider at the height of 1000 m. As one of the manufacturers of these winches such a cycle consumes 0.3 kg of fuel ....
The perfect glider = 47, a half-ton glider at the speed of 95 km / h while flying in a straight line, beat 47 km. or two such cycles, that is, 0.65 kg of fuel, it should run up ... 100 km at a speed of 95 km / h....
It seems to me that it should be entered in the book Guinness

Andrew :smoking: :smoking:

Edited by Feliks, 25 July 2013 - 08:15.


#1130 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 26 July 2013 - 10:50

Well, now my professional work finally connected with engines or refrigerators :rolleyes:
SOUND POWER
Straight from Los Alamos....

http://www.americans...ower-of-sound/4

http://www.fact-foun...erator_progress

I think you can use here too Amplifiers Sound, which do not receive ANY energy and strengthen sound. Such are the classic example of brass instruments.

Posted Image

Posted Image

Obvious example of sound reinforcement, without providing OF ANY energy from outside the acoustic guitar. Everyone knows that that plays a lot louder than the electric guitar is not connected to any amplifier ... (Board)

I think what would have happened if the thermoelectric acoustic generator strengthen the amplified acoustic sound that does not drain. Do you already know what I was thinking again? :rolleyes:

Andrew :smoking: :smoking:

Edited by Feliks, 26 July 2013 - 11:13.


#1131 manolis

manolis
  • Member

  • 377 posts
  • Joined: May 03

Posted 27 July 2013 - 05:15

Well, now my professional work finally connected with engines or refrigerators :rolleyes:
SOUND POWER
. . .

Andrew


Hello Feliks.

The reasoning behind my previous post in your thread was to remind that every time someone gains energy, someone else looses it.
Until now no exception of the rule has been recorded.

At first look the elevating flight of a half-ton glider (or of an eagle flying for hours with its wings immovable) seems as violating the principle / law of the energy conservation.

Similarly, at first look the strong sound emitted by an acoustic guitar (or a bell, or a gong) seems as having more energy than the energy offered by the finger of the guitarist (or by the bell-clapper, or by the gong-mallet).

If this was true, the world goes upside-down.


But, is it so?
Is the energy of a sound more than the energy offered to the musical instrument,
or it is just the sensitivity of the ear?


To say that the sound is very strong and can be heart from 100m away, is not enough.
To say that the electric guitar cannot generate the strong sound of an acoustic guitar, is also not enough.
The way is to measure the incoming energy (i.e. the energy provided by the finger of the guitarist to the guitar string), then to measure the total energy of the emitted sound and finally to compare those two.


A 1 watt LED can be seen from several Km away at night.
The power density at 5Km away from the LED is:
0.0000000000003 watt/cm2 (it is the power of the light emitted by the LED divided by the surface of a sphere having 5Km radius).
If the iris of the eye is 1cm2 (it is less), the energy of the light that enters into the eye is 3*10^-13.
To see the LED from 5Km away is possible not because the LED emits a great amount of power, but because of the extreme sensitivity of the eye.


When you try to violate / bypass a fundamental law like the law of the energy conservation, you need stronger evidences / facts / proofs than the “strong sound emitted by an acoustic guitar”, or than the “elevation of a heavy glider into the air”.

I hope you agree.

Thanks
Manolis Pattakos

#1132 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 27 July 2013 - 17:39

Hello Feliks.


When you try to violate / bypass a fundamental law like the law of the energy conservation, you need stronger evidences / facts / proofs than the “strong sound emitted by an acoustic guitar”, or than the “elevation of a heavy glider into the air”.

I hope you agree.

Thanks
Manolis Pattakos


I see you did not understand what it is the difference between electric guitar and guitar with soundbox. Because here at all says nothing about the violation of the law of conservation of energy. Just saying emphatically that the acoustic guitar seems much more louder sound than an electric guitar without an amplifier, at the exact same way of playing. ... That is amplified acoustic guitar sound that the strings with exactly the same energy of jerks, like the guitar ektryczna without electricity. And it is a fact that everyone knows and does not require confirmation ... any calculations. Just music played on the guitar every good hearing, and the board does not hear the guitar ... So soundboard acoustic guitar is certainly an amplifier, without any external energy. So there can be no question of any law of conservation of energy. This is certainly just the amplifier, with the same energy inserted.
Slowly, because it is a completely new approach ..

Andrew :smoking: :smoking:


1978 I did live my friends. Unfortunately, one of them already dead ..

Edited by Feliks, 27 July 2013 - 18:03.


#1133 manolis

manolis
  • Member

  • 377 posts
  • Joined: May 03

Posted 28 July 2013 - 05:07

I see you did not understand what it is the difference between electric guitar and guitar with soundbox. Because here at all says nothing about the violation of the law of conservation of energy. Just saying emphatically that the acoustic guitar seems much more louder sound than an electric guitar without an amplifier, at the exact same way of playing. ... That is amplified acoustic guitar sound that the strings with exactly the same energy of jerks, like the guitar ektryczna without electricity. And it is a fact that everyone knows and does not require confirmation ... any calculations. Just music played on the guitar every good hearing, and the board does not hear the guitar ... So soundboard acoustic guitar is certainly an amplifier, without any external energy. So there can be no question of any law of conservation of energy. This is certainly just the amplifier, with the same energy inserted.
Slowly, because it is a completely new approach ..0Five.mp3"] [/url]


Feliks,

An amplifier receives a signal in its input and emits a similar, but stronger, signal from its output; stronger means having more energy.

An amplifier is fed with energy from a source of energy, a part of which goes to the signal at the output.

In an ideal amplifier the "form" of the output signal is exactly the same with the "form" of to the input signal; besides, the output signal carries all the energy consumed by the amplifier (and the energy of the input signal).

In the real world amplifiers, there is a difference (deformation / noise) between the form of the input signal and the form of the output signal; also a part of the energy provided to the amplifier is consumed inside the amplifier, heating it.


An acoustic guitar is not an amplifier.
It is an energy converter (it has no a power source other than the input signal).
It receives energy from the vibrating string and changes it to sound.
The sound has always less energy than the energy provided to the string.

If the mean force applied to the string of the acoustic guitar by the finger of the guitarist is 0.1 Kp (1Nt), and the distance (from the "rest" position) from where the string is released is 0.005m (5mm), the energy given to the acoustic guitar is 1Nt*0.005m=0.005 Joules.
The total energy of the sound emitted by the guitar is less than 0.005 Joules. It could be 0.004 Joules, but it can never be 0.006 Joules.

An electric guitar besides being an energy converter, is also an amplifier; it receives the 0.005 Joules when the finger of the guitarist releases the string, then it consumes electric power in order to emit a similar sound of bigger energy, say of 1 Joule. The amplifier consumes, say, 1.5 Joules of electric power in order to provide the 1 Joule sound.
When you switch-off the amplifier of an electric guitar, the sound generated is not as strong as in the acoustic guitar; but this is OK. What matters, in the case of the electric guitar, is the quality of the sound when the amplifier is switched-on.


If I am wrong in some point, please correct me.
If I am right, it is an opportunity to rethink about the cases you mentioned so far.

Why I wrote these posts to your thread?
For the young people who are not familiar with the "energy matters", it is confusing to read in a technical forum that there are cases wherein energy is generated from nothing.
Until now there are no exceptions of the energy conservation law; not a single one.
The energy changes forms.
The energy passes from one system to another.
But the total amount of energy in an isolated system neither increases nor decreases.

Thanks
Manolis Pattakos


#1134 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 28 July 2013 - 11:46

Attitude so short, the question is: Is the box rezonasowe acoustic guitar sound is the amplifier, without additional energy tied outside in stosusunku to not connected to any electric guitar amplifier? or agree with me that this is the one amplifier? Please send me a short answer yes or no.
About the same answer about whether tuba (all brass instruments) is a sound amplifier die, in which the sound is created? Please answer yes or no is amplified ...

There is, of many different amplifiers without additional energy from the outside world around us ... Well, for example, a YAGI antenna or parabolic. And it strengthens both the transmitting and the receiving of signals ... always a strengthening ... At least to the strengthening of what we are interested in is successfully used .. without additional energy input. ,


http://en.wikipedia....Antenna_(radio)

Posted Image


Andrew :smoking: :smoking:



#1135 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,499 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 28 July 2013 - 12:01

The parabolic reflector does not amplify, it concentrates. The energy at the receiver is the same as (or slightly less than) the energy over the whole of the dish, not more.

#1136 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 28 July 2013 - 12:28

The parabolic reflector does not amplify, it concentrates. The energy at the receiver is the same as (or slightly less than) the energy over the whole of the dish, not more.



Of course, with strengthened. Its strengthening are given up in the name of "gain" and it is precisely stated in dB (decibels)


"
Main article: Antenna gain
Gain is a parameter which measures the degree of directivity of the antenna's radiation pattern. A high-gain antenna will preferentially radiate in a particular direction. Specifically, the antenna gain, or power gain of an antenna is defined as the ratio of the intensity (power per unit surface) radiated by the antenna in the direction of its maximum output, at an arbitrary distance, divided by the intensity radiated at the same distance by a hypothetical isotropic antenna.
The gain of an antenna is a passive phenomenon - power is not added by the antenna, but simply redistributed to provide more radiated power in a certain direction than would be transmitted by an isotropic antenna. An antenna designer must take into account the application for the antenna when determining the gain. High-gain antennas have the advantage of longer range and better signal quality, but must be aimed carefully in a particular direction. Low-gain antennas have shorter range, but the orientation of the antenna is relatively inconsequential. For example, a dish antenna on a spacecraft is a high-gain device that must be pointed at the planet to be effective, whereas a typical Wi-Fi antenna in a laptop computer is low-gain, and as long as the base station is within range, the antenna can be in any orientation in space. It makes sense to improve horizontal range at the expense of reception above or below the antenna.[10]
In practice, the half-wave dipole is taken as a reference instead of the isotropic radiator. The gain is then given in dBd (decibels over dipole):
NOTE: 0 dBd = 2.15 dBi. It is vital in expressing gain values that the reference point be included. Failure to do so can lead to confusion and error."

Outside observer, watching it as a reinforcement without any additional energy from the outside

Andrew :smoking: :smoking:

#1137 manolis

manolis
  • Member

  • 377 posts
  • Joined: May 03

Posted 28 July 2013 - 13:14

Attitude so short, the question is: Is the box rezonasowe acoustic guitar sound is the amplifier, without additional energy tied outside in stosusunku to not connected to any electric guitar amplifier? or agree with me that this is the one amplifier? Please send me a short answer yes or no.
About the same answer about whether tuba (all brass instruments) is a sound amplifier die, in which the sound is created? Please answer yes or no is amplified ...
There is, of many different amplifiers without additional energy from the outside world around us ... Well, for example, a YAGI antenna or parabolic. And it strengthens both the transmitting and the receiving of signals ... always a strengthening ... At least to the strengthening of what we are interested in is successfully used .. without additional energy input. ,


Felix,

in your question:
“Is the box rezonasowe acoustic guitar sound is the amplifier?”
the answer is “no”.
The acoustic guitar just converts a big part of the energy given to the string (by the finger of the guitarist) into sound.

In your other question:
“Is tuba (all brass instruments) a sound amplifier?”
the answer is again “no”.
The energy of the sound is less than the energy given to the instrument in order to generate the sound.

In our world there is no device / instrument / mechanism that can act as an amplifier without additional energy from the outside world. Not one.

The parabolic YAGI antenna (and any other antenna) just concentrates / focuses the energy falling on its surface into a small area at the focal point wherein the receiver / sensor is located.
If the diameter of the YAGI antenna is 40 m, and the sensor at the focal point is 10cm2, the energy density of the signal on the sensor is 1,250,000 times higher than the energy density (watts/m^2) of the signal arriving onto the antenna surface.
But the total power of the signal focused on the sensor at the focal point is less than the total power falling onto the antenna surface (the reflector cannot reflect / concentrate the 100% of the falling radiation / power).

Similarly, when you use a 10 cm diameter lens to concentrate the sunlight into a 0.25 cm2 area at the focal point, the lens is not amplifying the falling energy. It just concentrates it. And because the energy density at the focal point is pi*(10/2)^2/0.25 = 314 times higher, you can use it to put fire in a piece of dark paper.
But again the light energy arriving onto the focal point is less than the light energy falling onto the lens area (there are always losses; the transparency of a lens cannot be 100%).

In every case the device / instrument / mechanism takes an amount of energy and provides a smaller amount of energy in a similar or in a different form. If you want the output to have more energy than the input, you need to provide energy from an external source (electric or other) to an amplifier. A part of this energy will be changed, by the amplifier, into output signal.


I propose to take another look at the energy conservation law.
It is an extremely useful limitation.
It has no exceptions; not even a tiny one.
If there was a single exception, we would exploit it to produce infinite / vast amounts of energy from nothing and the world would change at once; unfortunately, there is not.

Thanks
Manolis Pattakos

#1138 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 28 July 2013 - 14:30

Felix,

I propose to take another look at the energy conservation law.
It is an extremely useful limitation.
It has no exceptions; not even a tiny one.
If there was a single exception, we would exploit it to produce infinite / vast amounts of energy from nothing and the world would change at once; unfortunately, there is not.

Thanks
Manolis Pattakos


I think you still do not know the Greeks on instruments ... Excellent acoustic guitars doing the Italians, not to mention the genius here Stradivarius, :rolleyes:
I see that your "no" to deny the obvious ...
Because after what would have done such a big resonace boxes for guitars? we all know that when you come up loud and played nicely ... and not to be matched to their holding also brass instruments are made just to loud and nicely played, and not just to be nice shone and sparkled in the sun ... And the world is at peace, despite your "no" ... Maybe, you are so much a 'no', because all your life, you could not look at it from the side of the law of conservation of energy. I have not writes that it missed. and I can do it. I only discuss what also recognize the others have, that is to say that the guitar sound box amplifies sound ..
Or I've gone deaf ... :rolleyes:
But follow on my way for .. Here he called the manufacturer produces an amplifier into the air ...

http://www.exair.com.....ers Home.aspx

You can buy one for cooling the engine test bench :wave:

Now you know which companies areby the way came Vortex .. :rolleyes:

http://en.wikipedia....i/Coandă_effect

Well, we have another amplifier, without additional energy.... :rolleyes:

Andrew :smoking: :smoking:

Edited by Feliks, 28 July 2013 - 17:25.


#1139 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 28 July 2013 - 14:52

:wave:

http://f1framework.b...its-use-in.html

http://www.newfluidt...CT_AND_LIFT.pdf

:smoking: :smoking:

Advertisement

#1140 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,499 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 28 July 2013 - 16:06

:wave:

http://f1framework.b...its-use-in.html


"An increase in the velocity of any fluid or gas is always accompanied by a decrease in pressure."


http://www.newfluidt...CT_AND_LIFT.pdf

The Coanda Effect is man made



#1141 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 28 July 2013 - 17:05

"An increase in the velocity of any fluid or gas is always accompanied by a decrease in pressure."




Yes you're right, Tony, but if we are interested in increase speed, it does not necessarily concern us pressure drop ...
Well, for example, in the venturi nozzle speed increase is, say, 10 times higher, and the pressure drop only a few millimeters of mercury ...

Andrew :smoking: :smoking:


#1142 Tony Matthews

Tony Matthews
  • Member

  • 17,499 posts
  • Joined: September 08

Posted 28 July 2013 - 18:18

Oh well, I give up. Good luck, Feliks.

#1143 h4887

h4887
  • Member

  • 879 posts
  • Joined: July 04

Posted 28 July 2013 - 19:21

I'd vote for anyone who promised to repeal the Law of Conservation of Energy... :cool:

#1144 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 28 July 2013 - 22:44

This is very glad that we have a consensus that there are amplifiers, without additional energy from the outside. For now, only enough and so much ...

Now you need to develop a general rule, in order to know in which direction to follow. Because solutions may, in eyebrow appearances, very much .. Some good, some worse ..

Andrew :wave:


#1145 manolis

manolis
  • Member

  • 377 posts
  • Joined: May 03

Posted 29 July 2013 - 04:16

For the youngsters who read this thread I would propose to open a high school physics book and read about the "energy".

I would also propose to Search in the Internet for the “Energy Conservation Law”; a few indicative results are below.

The principle that energy cannot be created or destroyed, although it can be changed from one form to another; no violation of this principle has been found.

A principle stating that the total energy of an isolated system remains constant regardless of changes within the system. conservation of energy…

Energy can be neither be created nor destroyed but only changed…

Energy in a system may take on various forms (e.g. kinetic, potential, heat, light). The law of conservation of energy states that energy may neither be created nor ...

The law of conservation of energy is that energy cannot be created or destroyed, but it can be transferred or transformed from one form to another.

Energy can neither be created nor it is destroyed, however energy can be converted from one form energy to ...

The law of conservation of energy says that energy is neither created nor destroyed.

Law of conservation of energy: the fundamental principle of physics that the total energy of an isolated system is constant despite internal changes.

The law of conservation of energy can be difficult to understand. Fear not, …

The Principle of Law of the Conservation of Energy has been thus formulated by Clerk Maxwell: "The total energy of any body or system of bodies is a quantity which can neither be increased nor diminished by any mutual action of these bodies, though it may be transformed into any other forms of which energy is susceptible".

Manolis Pattakos

#1146 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,305 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 29 July 2013 - 06:25

This Clerk Maxwell bloke - any relation to Mr Betz?



#1147 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 29 July 2013 - 22:55

This Clerk Maxwell bloke - any relation to Mr Betz?


Right notice....

When I studied physics at the beginning of the 70 at the Jagiellonian University (only two years) with interest a young student, eager for knowledge, I listened to all the lectures .. And I accepted everything without any reservations. But when the lectures have been lined with entropy and the law of conservation of energy, for the first time in rebelled ... I could not then understand why entropy always has to grow ... it seemed to me even then that this is a false assumption ... Because without deeply into the mathematics, how can something continue to grow? and what will happen as this runs out? - The fundamental question .. Well, since then he looked rather more skeptical about the theories derived from the entropy ...
Now, after almost two centuries since its foundation, we can see that there are many exceptions to it,,,

Well in addition to those already raised above, there are such, for example, photovoltaic panels that give us energy from the light of the sun ... I just let it not be said that the are earth cools, because even if this is in theory, it is still such a small part of it is that in practice we may ignore these welds and therefore it is called free energy. that is, without the ligation of the principle of conservation of energy. For us it is a real fact that energy gratuity ...

Also, if we start to consider, our human ways of processing energy from their food eaten by us and the vast possibilities of the implementation of very hard work later, we see that, and here's something not quite agree with the principle of conservation of energy.
It is good that we live already in recent times, and even physics can be more humanized .. and not hang on dogma .... Because we own high-performance machine, which we know how much we can do sometimes physical or mental effort that it just needs a lot of energy ... well except that some of it largely wasted ... :rolleyes:

Andrew :smoking: :smoking:

#1148 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,305 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 29 July 2013 - 23:20

None of your examples contradict the law of conservation of energy.

The energy content of food is well known. An adult male in a labour intensive job may consume 15,000 - 20,000 kJ/day. That is about 0.5 kW for 8 hours. In reality he can probably output no more than 0.1 kW averaged over 8 hours.

Increasing entropy? There are no exceptions yet discovered to the best of my knowledge.

The universe will continue to grow. It will cool off and darken too. I am not worried.

#1149 Feliks

Feliks
  • Member

  • 639 posts
  • Joined: December 04

Posted 29 July 2013 - 23:59

None of your examples contradict the law of conservation of energy.

The energy content of food is well known. An adult male in a labour intensive job may consume 15,000 - 20,000 kJ/day. That is about 0.5 kW for 8 hours. In reality he can probably output no more than 0.1 kW averaged over 8 hours.

Increasing entropy? There are no exceptions yet discovered to the best of my knowledge.

The universe will continue to grow. It will cool off and darken too. I am not worried.



You're right, I was not too worried ..
just as much as to why this increase in entropy is to be forwarded to the universe through the interstellar vacuums that transmits energy reluctantly ... even though the sun it would do .. and photovoltaic panels on the space station are ... But with the expanding into the universe, it is no longer I'd be he agreed ...
Firstly, we do not know that it really is ...
. Secondly, I am not sure whether this is permitted Creator .. :rolleyes:

Andrew :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Not just another inaccuracy .. Peltier modules, or they give a lot of electrical energy, with a relatively small temperature difference .... I did once such experience ...
Now anecdote ... When I wanted to buy an electronics store such Modulus (1990), asking the seller, I forgot the name "Peltier" and asked this: Do you have a such elements through which the electrical current is let go, it's cool? . The seller,, despite the fact that I knew a little, he looked at me as offended and said .. "Sir, as I learned in school, when current flows, it always generates heat up ..." I said sorry and walked out ... ):

Edited by Feliks, 30 July 2013 - 00:07.


#1150 gruntguru

gruntguru
  • Member

  • 5,305 posts
  • Joined: January 09

Posted 30 July 2013 - 00:55

Now anecdote ... When I wanted to buy an electronics store such Modulus (1990), asking the seller, I forgot the name "Peltier" and asked this: Do you have a such elements through which the electrical current is let go, it's cool? . The seller,, despite the fact that I knew a little, he looked at me as offended and said .. "Sir, as I learned in school, when current flows, it always generates heat up ..." I said sorry and walked out ... ):

:lol:

In the bigger picture he was correct. A Peltier is simply a heat pump and the electrical energy put in re-emerges as heat. The Peltier absorbs heat into its cold face and rejects heat from its hot face. The rejected heat always exceeds the absorbed heat. The difference is the electrical energy input.