Can a Core-less Dynamo Really Achieve Double Efficiency?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter goran d
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Dynamo
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the concept of a core-less dynamo and its potential to achieve double efficiency, exploring theoretical arguments and implications related to electromagnetic energy conversion. Participants examine the validity of claims regarding efficiency and the underlying physics principles involved.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that a core-less dynamo could theoretically achieve a maximum efficiency of 2 based on the relationship between JxB emf and E.J emf, suggesting that the output could be twice the mechanical energy input.
  • Others argue that the comparison between the vector nature of JxB emf and the scalar nature of E.J emf indicates a flaw in the initial argument, implying that the concept may violate conservation of energy principles.
  • A participant questions the direction of the Poynting vector, suggesting that for effective energy conversion, the Poynting vector should flow outward rather than inward, which could imply a misunderstanding of the system's operation.
  • One participant reiterates the initial claim about maximum efficiency, restating the argument without addressing the critiques raised.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus; there are competing views regarding the feasibility of achieving double efficiency in a core-less dynamo, with significant disagreement on the validity of the underlying arguments.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes references to pseudoscience and the community's rules against over-unity claims, which may influence the tone and direction of the conversation.

goran d
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
It seems that a core-less dynamo would have a maximum efficiency of 2.
The argument is as follows:
JxB emf= E.J emf
JxB does no work
E.J does work
Thus output is twice the mechanical energy spent
Inward Poynting vector?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
goran d said:
The argument is as follows:
JxB emf= E.J emf
The left hand side is a vector. The right hand side is a scalar. That should be a good hint that the argument is wrong. (In case non conservation of energy weren’t enough of a hint)
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71, berkeman and russ_watters
goran d said:
Inward Poynting vector?
If you want to convert rotor energy to EM energy, you will need Poynting to flow outwards. Inward suggests it is actually a motor or resistor that consumes electrical energy.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
goran d said:
It seems that a core-less dynamo would have a maximum efficiency of 2.
The argument is as follows:
JxB emf= E.J emf
JxB does no work
E.J does work
Thus output is twice the mechanical energy spent
Inward Poynting vector?

We do not allow the discussion of nonsense like over-unity processes (efficiency = 2). Per the PF rules:

micromass said:
Pseudoscience, such as (but not limited to):
Perpetual motion and "free energy" discussions (see our Insights Article here)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion
http://www.skepdic.com/freeenergy.html
http://www.skepdic.com/perpetual.html

You are on a 10-day vacation from the PF now. Not that it seems to matter -- you seem to only stop by PF every year or two to post nonsense. If you do it again, you will be permanently banned. Have a nice day.
 
  • Love
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71 and dlgoff

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
64
Views
8K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • Poll Poll
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
7K