WhatIfMachine
- 30
- 0
do you really need to argue about this? yet AGAIN it is NOT perpetual motion, so none of that matters.
edit: and by the way the only reason I kept posting is because you kept trying to come back with a rebuttal of some sort. You claim that you're agreeing but then you keep trying to debunk what everyone is saying, more specifically about the closed systems. If you don't believe me, search your memory or simply look at the last 6 post on page 4
WhatIfMachine said:[link to cook site]
Again, the words "power" and "pressure" do not appear in those quotes, do they?WhatIfMachine said:so the last few quotes reguarding Dyson and turbines are meaningless?
might I direct your attention to the quote of said link in the top post of this page?
"Dyson claims the Air Multiplier increases the output of airflow by 15 times the amount it takes in through the pedestal's motor."
I suggest you start by reading actual science sites more, and sites about 'psionics' less, and then you'll be on your way to making an real contribution.
Again, the words "power" and "pressure" do not appear in those quotes, do they?
Post #47, point #1: you don't understand what "perpetual motion" means. That's the central issue in this thread - everything else is the particulars of why you don't understand.WhatIfMachine said:do you really need to argue about this? yet AGAIN it is NOT perpetual motion, so none of that matters.
Where? You've claimed that the energy of the airstream after mixing is greater than before mixing. So where is this energy coming from?in which case you don't have to worry about getting more energy form outside a closed system because all the necessary energy is inside the system already.
So you're claiming that the word "energy" appears in those quotes...? Did you even read your own link?power/energy same difference and I am pretty sure you know what I meant :P
Post #47, point #1: you don't understand what "perpetual motion" means. That's the central issue in this thread - everything else is the particulars of why you don't understand.
Where? You've claimed that the energy of the airstream after mixing is greater than before mixing. So where is this energy coming from?
So you're claiming that the word "energy" appears in those quotes...? Did you even read your own link?
Air surrounding the edges of the fan will also begin to flow in the direction of the breeze. This process is called entrainment. Through inducement and entrainment, Dyson claims the Air Multiplier increases the output of airflow by 15 times the amount it takes in through the pedestal's motor.
how do you think that happened? magic? it doesn't say it uses energy, but what else would it use? I still don't see how this makes the said quotes relevant.Air surrounding the edges of the fan will also begin to flow in the direction of the breeze.
WhatIfMachine said:might I direct your attention to the quote of said link in the top post of this page?
"Dyson claims the Air Multiplier increases the output of airflow by 15 times the amount it takes in through the pedestal's motor."
You can quote it, but when it comes to applying it, somehow you still get it wrong.WhatIfMachine said:Perpetual Motion: A mechanical motion that produces more energy than consumed...
Internal energy? So you think that when it goes through the device it gets much colder? Seems to me that if that were true, it would be a major selling point of the fan (in fact, it would render traditional a/c irrelevant)....the high vibration that keeps the gas a gas and not a liquid/solid?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motionA perpetual motion machine of the second kind is a machine which spontaneously converts thermal energy into mechanical work. When the thermal energy is equivalent to the work done, this does not violate the law of conservation of energy. However it does violate the more subtle second law of thermodynamics (see also entropy). The signature of a perpetual motion machine of the second kind is that there is only one heat reservoir involved, which is being spontaneously cooled without involving a transfer of heat to a cooler reservoir. This conversion of heat into useful work, without any side effect, is impossible, according to the second law of thermodynamics.
WhatIfMachine said:thats the kicker, its not a closed system. that's why I don't straight out call this a perpetual machine. the extra energy was suppose to come from the surrounding air as it was dragged by the breeze from the Dyson fan which was I thought was a regular fan that was remade to be highly energy conservative.
but apparently I am completely wrong, so unless further challenged I will leave and let this thread die.
Yes. Higher velocity flow necessarily involves more frictional and pressure losses than lower velocity flow. In particular, the airflow will lose a substantial fraction of its energy as it exits the nozzles.cjl said:Nope - if anything, the Dyson fan uses more power than a standard fan for the same airflow.
I get that now, that's why I am trying to end this thread.Yep. That says nothing about the energy content though. All it says is the the output is 15 times the flow rate of the input into the pedestal. What you don't seem to understand is that the output is lower pressure and velocity than the air from the pedestal alone.
see now this is what I meant by I don't accept the reasons of failure from a person who doesn't even understand what my point is...Internal energy? So you think that when it goes through the device it gets much colder? Seems to me that if that were true, it would be a major selling point of the fan (in fact, it would render traditional a/c irrelevant).
you didnt read the link did you?Nope - if anything, the Dyson fan uses more power than a standard fan for the same airflow. The Dyson fan was made to create smoother, more steady airflow than a standard fan, as well as to be somewhat of a novelty device.
Ok, well we've beaten this to death and you aren't listening to what is being said anyway, so I guess this thread has run its course.WhatIfMachine said:I get that now, that's why I am trying to end this thread.
see now this is what I meant by I don't accept the reasons of failure from a person who doesn't even understand what my point is...