J.C.MacSwell

For the infinith(sp?,never did get that right and never will) time, don't bring that argument up again!

Is all this from a conjecture of your own? Or can you provide a link?

Radiant cooling requires a large percentage of the background to be effective. Having a near absolute zero radiation sink of a small subtended area will not allow much cooling.

Thanks. I'll think about that next time I nervously present.

fixed!

With what? What would you suggest using to apply the force?

Yep, 0 % efficiency, or like the claims (correctly in context) on those electric heaters it's a 100% efficient heater.

32 feet of head is 14.7 psi or one atmosphere. Maximum head from that pump is 42 inches. That is less than 2 psi.

Take with a grain of salt my estimate as to how many cycles it would last. I was being facetious in my claim that it could work, due to the small, temporary and really insignificant energy source it had available to work using ambient temperature. I just looked for an energy source and sink. Since there is a small one that is not replaced, it will be very short lived. I made no attempt to calculate it, as it was clear it would not really work as claimed, for the reasons you stated in your original post.

This changes the meaning. Not illogical to exist, does not mean something logically exists.

I think it is as much to do with "when and how many", which is interesting.

Looks like it could work... for one cycle, since you start off with helium at 200 atm, possibly a second cycle at lesser output, using the room temperature air as a heat source and the cooled helium as a sink, maybe a third or fourth at less and less power and less and less efficiency. After that, from room temperature air as the energy source, and no sink ...not so much, it will come to halt. Something like this could work from solar energy, but not at the efficiencies or outputs implied

I won't comment on the "brainwaves" part, but otherwise it is obviously not illogical or impossible, unless it is impossible to biologically duplicate the basics of a cell phone. Somewhere in the Universe, some species likely uses telepathy IMO. So for my part, I will agree it is not illogical.

How would you ascertain that they scared the cows then scavenged vs simply scavenged?

You have a reduction in kinetic energy available as well, for the second set and for the first set of blades as well. The first set is in reduced flow due to the second set. The second set is in reduced flow and turbulence due to the first set. So you probably have greater inefficiencies than one set of blades alone.(less available power)

Tomorrow I will buy a sandwich.

Thanks.

I will say yes, definitely. Is Pharmacology a science? Psychology? How about the study of the Origins of the Universe? All of the above have limits to how rigorously they can examined, making it hard to separate the wheat from the chafe, good science from bad, but are they not all science?

Why another Universe? If the loss and gain for our Universe is equal...

Any Aether theory?

This guy was the first to make the measurements back in the 17th century: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ole_R%C3%B8mer

5) is interesting. Large areas of half time land / half time sea (and all other ratios between low and high tide) might certainly help transition from sea to land as well as force bio-diversification.

Keep in mind that the spring is in all inertial (and other) frames at all times, although it is always at rest in just one. It is not doing a dance to keep them all happy. It simply is measured differently in each frame.

I find it a lot easier flying West a few time zones. Adjusting is like staying up late but getting to sleep in. Coming back East is a much tougher adjustment.

There is friction, and other mechanical efficiency limits, but also the pistons are "running away from" the forces that are powering them. It's much harder to push with force against something that won't resist, and it's the force on the pistons that produce the torque.