| New Reply |
Does physics forbid such a device; a heat destroyer |
Share Thread | Thread Tools |
| Jul7-12, 04:36 AM | #52 |
|
|
Does physics forbid such a device; a heat destroyer
If one had a nuc reactor burning as hot as the surface of the sun and if there were materials that could withstand these tempertures. Could one drop a sphere into the burning mess that is in a complete vaccum. And if one had solar panels that could withstand the temperture could one have a sphere surrounded by them within the sphere in the nuc reaction receiving radiation from the hot bigger sphere surface and converting it to electricity without any heat been dumped in a cold sink?
|
| Jul7-12, 04:41 AM | #53 |
|
|
|
| Jul7-12, 05:12 AM | #54 |
|
|
Your post seemed to want to cool something down without having anything colder to dump the heat in. It is impossible to do that without putting energy in. DaleSpam came up with the neat idea of using space as your colder thing, putting the thing in contact with deep space, and if your machine is on a spaceship in deep space then that will be even easier. Like I said, the problem in that case is likely to not be cooling stuff down but keeping yourself warm. |
| Jul7-12, 05:21 AM | #55 |
|
|
As the panels approach the temperature of the reactor they become less and less efficient (meaning more of the energy they absorb goes into heating them up rather than producing electric current). |
| Jul7-12, 05:38 AM | #56 |
|
Mentor
|
|
| Jul7-12, 05:49 AM | #57 |
|
Mentor
|
As solar panels heat up, the electrons in the semi-conductor become more energetic, to the point where they posess enough thermal energy to jump the band gap. The problem is that with thermal energy they jump both directions. So what happens is that the energetic photon is absorbed, which pushes one electron across the band gap, but instead of generating a current a thermal electron just jumps backwards across the band gap. This actually happens at much lower temperatures than thermal equilibrium. Keeping solar panels cool is a major design consideration wrt efficiency. |
| Jul7-12, 08:04 AM | #58 |
|
Mentor
|
Just to put some numbers on this. Suppose that the heat source is pretty hot, producing heat at 1000ºC (1273 K). And suppose further that the device is in thermal contact with deep space, as I suggested, and so it is using deep space as the cold reservoir (2.7 K). So the Carnot efficiency is 1-Tc/Th = .998. This means that for every 1 MW of heat produced, the device could capture 998 kW as work (or other low entropy forms of energy) and would have to dump 2 kW to deep space to satisfy the second law of thermo.
You can use the law for radiative power transfer for a black body, which is [itex]\dot{Q}= \sigma (T_h^4-T_c^4) A[/itex]. So to radiate 2 kW at 1273 K to a bath of 2.7 K requires an area of .014 m². You can just scale those numbers up by however many MW you expect your power plant to produce. The technological advances would be to use deep space as the cold reservoir while radiating at the hot temperature. That isn't something we could do now, we would use a radiator as the cold reservoir which would be at an intermediate temperature between 1273 K and 2.7 K, reducing the maximum efficiency of the engine and increasing the surface area required to radiate. But that would be the limit of what is possible according to the laws of physics as we know them, so that would be the limit of what you could get away with using "future tech" but not breaking the laws of physics. |
| Jul7-12, 08:55 AM | #59 |
|
Mentor
|
@DaleSpam: You already need contact to the 2.7K-bath to extract 998kW. You cannot get this and feed a 1000°C-surface with the remaining 2kW. Otherwise you could use this 1000°C-surface again, and extract .998 of the 2kW... you see the problem? |
| Jul7-12, 09:08 AM | #60 |
|
|
The machine you are describing is exactly as the one in the Kelvin formulation of the second law. So, the answer is that it is impossible! |
| Jul7-12, 09:58 AM | #61 |
|
Mentor
|
But the second law of thermo is satisfied as long as at least 2 kW/MW goes to space. So I think that anything else is fair game for "future tech". Although, maybe the "future tech" is a way of arbitrarily increasing the effective surface area of the radiator. |
| Jul8-12, 12:25 PM | #62 |
|
Mentor
|
It turns out that there is a minimum at 955 K (64 m²/MW) which corresponds to a 25% efficiency on the engine. Any hotter than that and the engine becomes so inefficient that the radiator area needs to be larger, and any colder and the radiator itself becomes so inefficient that the area needs to be larger. However, there is a very broad range that is close to the minimum surface area. |
| Jul8-12, 01:39 PM | #63 |
|
Mentor
|
Why does it grow so much above 1200K? Close to 1273K, the efficiency is ~0 and you have to dump ~33% more heat. However, the temperature is higher by 1/3, which leads to a radiation of (4/3)^4 =~ 3 times the 955K-value. Based on this, I would expect that the required radiator area does not have any minimum.
|
| Jul8-12, 03:33 PM | #64 |
|
Mentor
|
For example, at a radiator temperature of 1200 K the engine is terribly inefficient (~6.7%). So every 1 W of power produced requires 17.4 W of heat from the hot reservior and so you need to dump 16.4 W to the radiator. This is 448% more heat than the 955 K value (3 W), not just 33% more. Remember, an engine is rated and designed for the power it produces, not the amount of fuel it burns. I suspect you are thinking of a constant heat input rather than a constant power output. |
| Jul8-12, 04:24 PM | #65 |
|
|
Question: Is the interesting process which takes place on the sun - going from very hot interior to relatively "cool" surface to very hot corona - an example of the physical process the OP has in mind?
Respectfully submitted, Steve |
| Jul9-12, 08:11 AM | #66 |
|
Mentor
|
Oh, you fixed the amount of usable work. Sorry, I thought you fixed the thermal input power as Deeviant does.
|
| Jul11-12, 06:50 PM | #67 |
|
|
It may well be my fictional but physical law obeying spaceship relies solely on black-body emission for cooling, but I was looking for something a bit more... exotic. |
| Jul11-12, 07:00 PM | #68 |
|
|
|
| New Reply |
| Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads for: Does physics forbid such a device; a heat destroyer
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | Replies | ||
| Does SR actually forbid FTL travel? | Special & General Relativity | 102 | ||
| Work done and total heat transfer for piston-cylinder device | Engineering, Comp Sci, & Technology Homework | 1 | ||
| What does the theory of common descent forbid? | Biology | 1 | ||
| U.S. Destroyer chases pirate ship | General Discussion | 12 | ||
| The great destroyer: human or nonhuman nature? | General Discussion | 5 | ||