1bobwhite

CaptainPanic, I believe the major factor for the disappearance of steam engine derived power in industry and the home started in the early 1900's with the electric power generation industry, and the electric motor. The electrification of the U.S. was still ongoing in the 1960's. There were still steam engines being used in the remote and rural areas to power the electric generators. Saw mills, grist mills, manufacturing shops, were switching from steam power to electric motors as fast as they could afford to. The steam processes were still used and in place, but the motive power within the plants was switched to electric motors. Petroleum powered engines, together with electricity finally spelled doom for the steam engine in general. The improvements to the commercially available steam engines essentially ended in the auto industry in the 1930's, and as you say fuel economy was not a real concern. The highway system was still primitive and rural, and road trips were generally short compared to today. My point exactly, the information is scarce. If you can find something, I'd appreciate it. I believe the efficiency for engines can be greatly improved by both the application of steam power techniques, and the heat exchanger improvements. I'll go into more detail next post. Bob.

CaptainPanic, Thank you for your careful considerations of my points. First I'll start with the steam cars of yesteryear. There were many many steam car manufacturers at the turn of last century. The whole industry was nearly dead by the 1930's, but two of them stood out, and lasted the longest because of their improvements. The Stanley, and the Dobel. Arguably the most advanced was the Dobel Car company. Its cars could be started up from frosty cold to drivable within 40 seconds with its flash boilers. The entire car had only 25 moving parts. Some of these cars had over 600,000 miles on them. The Model E, could go from 0 to 75 mph in 10 seconds, and 100 mph top speed. Check out http://www.damninteresting.com/the-last-great-steam-car If they don't think you could pick up chicks in one of these cars, they must be living on the moon. Another car to check out if you can find it is the Gvang steam car from Australia in the 1970's. I heard that it was bought up by Shell Oil Co. and promptly destroyed. What ever happened to Bill Lear's steam engine? My point here is a newly engineered and manufactured steam engine that could be dropped in as a replacement for a 350 chevy engine, and designed to be invisible to the operator is not only possible but doable. Problem being it would have to be aftermarket, as no OEM is going to touch it. No only that but other "factors" would present themselves to try to prevent your success. Because heat exchangers are a vital part of the engines system, their improved design would also contribute to the overall efficiency. Nearly all automotive and most industrial radiators, evaporators, and condensers, still use the same tube and fin designs with the serpentine fins that were designed in the 1900's. Most of the current thinking is, the thinner the fins and the more surface area, the faster the heat dissipation to the air. Also making more fins per inch along the tube will help. Several problems show up with this approach. First, The fin contact area on the tube has not been sufficiently increased. Second, Air is poorer than metal as a conductor of heat, so going thinner with the metal actually goes contrary to extracting heat from the tube to out along the fin. Third, While increasing the number of fins per inch along the tube does increase surface area, it also causes the air flow to be further restricted in its rate of flow across the exchanger, and is easier to clog up with debris. My heat exchanger design does greatly increase the surface contact area on the "tube" but at the same time its configuration also allows for a much easier cleaning because of much greater spacing to take advantage of increased turbulence, and a reduction of the back pressure in forcing air through. Boilers are still made the old fashion way, either fire tube, or water tube. Some small specialty boilers I've seen do greatly improve upon the water tube design and hold great promise, but by and large most everything else has not changed at all in how the water is brought to steam. Many companies are getting rid of their boiler systems because of the insurance, regulation problems and bureaucratic red tape and are going to steam generators instead. One liter of water will produce 1600 approx. liters of steam at atmosphere. With a steam engine of the Newcomen design, a single cylinder engine with a one liter displacement could have potentially 1600 power strokes, or 800 revolutions of a wheel. A one liter cylinder displacement is approx a 4 in. bore x 4in. stroke. ( I don't do metric conversion well) A 4 in bore has approx. 12 square inches area, times 15 psi atmosphere equals a 180 pound push on a crank with a 2 in throw, giving approx. 30 foot pounds of torque. This is roughly the equivalent of a 30 hp gas engine, and is done with an atmospheric steam engine that is not using pressure much above atmospheric pressure at sea level. Improvements are happening in different areas of steam like you say, but at a disappointing pace. Bob.

DanHalen, Just run the air past your computer intake fan and the crt monitor screen. They should clean up the air pretty good by the way they collect all the dirt. Electrostatic air cleaners are used throughout industry and can do a fantastic job. They all have maintenance to be done. Someone has to clean them from time to time. Metal plates may be used no problem, just keep them statically charged to one of the polarities. Make arrangements to momentarily reverse the polarities, or mechanically rap the plates, and the dirt will fall off to the bottom. Some of the dirt will not fall off because it is mixed with cooking oils and other aerosols that have precipitated onto the plates, and this will have to be washed off during your maintenance. One cheap way from the old days of crt monitors, and still from cheap old tv's is to use the chassis with the flyback transformer circuit attached to the metal plates instead of the tube. Put the B+ on one plate, and the chassis ground to the other plate. B+ averaged around 25,000 volts, and could deliver a nasty zap, so be careful. Believe it or not but water droplets may be statically charged and attract particles, but you said cheap, and these aren't that, unless you want to construct one of Lord Kelvins thunderstorm chambers at home. It can be done, just Google Lord Kelvin's thunderstorm and check it out. Good luck, Bob.

Swansont, ajb, If in all of these reactions all you get is more particles and their fragments, then what is being "converted". What does the E=... stand for in the math? More particles? Are gamma rays particles? What is binding energy, transition particles? Also in the fusion reactions, if pressures are high enough, then is it possible that nuclei bombardment and x-ray, gamma ray energies recombine these nuclei in a reverse of the decay sequence to form the larger elemental nuclei? Is that what is done when these powerful particle colliders momentarily produce new elements of extremely short half life with higher atomic numbers only seen in the lab? Lawrencium being the example. Just more thoughts, Bob

Yomomma, You have some interesting information to be considered. Here are some sources that you may find helpful in your research. You may have to revise some of your views and your math after reading through it, but keep up your studies. Check this one out first: http://www.springerlink.com/content/753717276h869880/ Solar activity and global seismicity of the earth http://www.solarviews.com/eng/io.htm Io http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1980PEPI...21...22H Gravitational heating of planets http://www.planetaryexploration.net/jupiter/io/tidal_heating.html Io: Jupiter's Volcanic Moon Tidal Heating http://lunarorigin.com/tidal-heating TIDAL HEATING http://www.geol.umd.edu/~jmerck/geol100/lectures/02.html Early history of the Earth http://www.planetary.brown.edu/m42/m42_67.pdf THE STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF SEISMIC ACTIVITY OF THE EARTH ON THE BASIS OF THE DRM-APPROACH. S. G. Valeev, S. V. Kurkina Ulyanovsk State Technical University, 32, Severny Venez st., 432027, Russià sgv@ulstu.ru It seems were are now in the beginning of another solar cycle with increasing magnetic sunspot activity and increasing radiance. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cycle Impacts of the solar cycle There does seem to be correlation between magnetic sunspot cycles, and seismic activity on the earth, according to these references. Its apparently been happening like this for eons, so there is probably no need to be concerned about a doomsday scenario. Local human disasters caused by geologic event, though terrible, are nevertheless not indicative of worldwide disaster. I hope you’ll find these helpful. Bob.

Ive been reading the most awesome book. It is The Urantia Book. It is also on line at http://www.urantia.org/en, as well as at Barnes and Noble bookstores. It has science stuff that will astonish you, check it out!

These are questions that I don't have theories for or proofs, but just speculations based on "observations". Is there any evidence for or math for the "condensation" of energy back into matter? We know that in fission and fusion reactions, a portion of the yield is energy that does not have particles, "pure energy", but the remaining particles are matter. How are these elements formed in the first place? Where is the transition point? What would be the conditions necessary for this transition? Is it possible that the actions of fusion provide heavier and heavier and larger elemental nuclei with their corresponding electrons and they cool, with the remaining energy lost? Or does the energy as it disperses into the cold of deep space condense back into matter. We know that combinations of temperature and pressure give all manner of changes to matter, for instance water when heated under pressure to its critical temperature and beyond into the supercritical temperature behaves such that steam and the liquid phase become indistinguishable. Then is it also possible that this same condition can apply to matter at the much higher temperatures and pressures where particles of mass transition back and forth between mass and energy and are indistinguishable? Transitional particles of unknown properties would then exist under those conditions. Would the neutron stars have those conditions? Would our own sun have those conditions? Is it possible that the dark matter of space we've heard about is nothing more than the energy condensation that has clumped back together? Just some thoughts of a fevered brain. Bob

Altair66 , Try Googling "Methernitha", and see if any of the information interests you. Although perpetual motion machines are unknown and theoretically impossible, there exists on the earth many possible sources of energy that have not been adequately explored to be developed as power sources. Most of our more easily derived power comes from the sun in different forms other than light. Some of this power may be within our reach of budget and understanding for its development. One cheating way to get some "perpetual power" is to construct a radio reception circuit that will tune into a local transmitting tower, and when Qd up, this signal is then rectified to DC to give a few watts of power continuously. Construction plans for these have been around for some time. I've successfully constructed electrostatic motors that would turn about 1500 rpm. My next step is to try to extract naturally occurring static sources and tie them into the motor circuit. The static is there, but so far I haven't succeeded. No, I'm not using the cat, mainly because she won't cooperate anyway.

insane-alein, swansont, You are both right on the sensitivities of the different systems. If the period of the gravity waves frequency is very long, then the slower gravimeter system may be the way to go, but if they are extremely short, then they fall within the range of the laser systems extreme sensitivity. Isn't the suns gravity detectable as a "wave" with a period of 24 hours? Or the moon with a period of 28 days? What I feel is missing and I don't see in LIGO, is the vertical component that is in line with the earths gravity. With the earth gravity as the bias reference, incoming signals from gravity sources then add to or subtract from this vertical component. As they are now, only the horizontal arms of LIGO are used, and they are on the tangent of the earths gravity centerline. Perhaps a vertical shaft boring located at the apex of the other two arms, with suitable beam splitters and support equipment for the experiment could add that missing component. At any rate, gravity waves have yet to be detected by any of the current methods. See: http://www.wired.com/science/space/news/2007/10/gravitational_waves Can anyone explain the gravimeter signal variations (noise) that seems to come from directly overhead, and seems to correspond with the positions of celestial systems directly overhead? These signals can be verified, but separating noise from noise may be too tedious and unproductive. But, if they have direct correlation with directly overhead systems, then detecting the "waves" is a matter of fine tuning the system to eliminate the other noise. Granted it is amateur and with some far out speculation, but check it out anyway as this noise shows up on even the best instruments; http://www.rexresearch.com/hodorhys/smplgm/smplgm.htm Or; http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=detecting-extraterrestria&page=3 Bob.

The concept of infinity in mathematics has of necessity to be constrained to a set in order for finite numbers to be applied in the formulas, and have any meaning in the resultant answers. Infinity is not null set, or undefined as is Zero, but a constraint on the endless progression, for the formula math to have a definable result. Numbers such as PI, or ones that are endless such as 12.666666.... to "infinity" are truncated for ease of use. After a determined amount, the remainder is of no value to the degree of accuracy required. For that matter all math that uses the concept of infinity is an approximation of the actual. Its is a matter of determining the level of accuracy required for the solution. Any manipulation of infinity by addition, subtraction, multiplication, or division, will give the same result unless it is constrained to a set, and thus limited to a resultant that may now be manipulated. In the physical world the infinities are distance and position from the observer. All matter and energy has been determined to be "countable" quanta with a space reference for both position and time. The infinity of distance is what is beyond the observable. The possible positions within the observable range, are supposedly infinite however with physical units the actual range of possible positions may not be infinite but constrained by their dimensions and their reactive behavior. Most of these actual numbers however are beyond our practical mathematics, and are just treated as infinity. For instance the number and frequency of collisions of molecules of a gas against a vessel wall that gives us a "pressure". Bob

engineerjoe, If you will Google "amateur turbine", many sites will come up to perhaps get you started and fired up. Good luck, and when you are behind the protective barrier for startup, be sure to still wear your safety glasses! Bob.

swansont, For a synopsis of gravimeters, refer to: http://geology.about.com/library/weekly/aa050999.htm A Project of Constant Improvement Fantastically sensitive gravity meters gather data now for science tomorrow Since gravity waves are still just a theory at this point, by what method did you determine the magnitude of sensitivity that is necessary for the gravity detectors? It may be possible that the detection of these waves will require a different approach for their discovery. Maybe just a different arrangement or combination of instrumentation. Constant improvements in equipment and methods for experimentation into everything conceivable concerning gravity waves will eventually turn up something, either proving or disproving the present theories. Some of this experimentation is within the reach of amateurs like us around the world. Bob.

insane_alien, I guess I should have stipulated better the conditions of the experiment that I feel could be beneficial to the experiment. The layout on the ground may be 90 deg (possibly on the null plane) to the incoming signals. If one of these legs was pointing vertically at the source (eclipsing binaries), then the detecting elements would be in alignment with the incoming signals. Possibly by using the LIGO laser systems aboard geosynchronous orbitals. By using laser interferometry to sense the action of the gravimeter, the detection systems capabilities of both would be enhanced by their combined sensitivities, thereby providing the necessary levels of sensitivity for the experiment. Further thoughts, Bob.

insane_alien, I've perused through the LIGO, and find it very interesting and may be usefull when tied in with other possible experimental approaches. I don't believe LIGO alone is going to it. For instance, We now have gravimeters that are extremely sensitive to gravitational changes. If these are combined with the laser interferometry and arranged in such a way and positioned to precisely aim (source to the gravity center of the earth) at rotating eclipsing binaries, for instance, and compare the signal if present, to the light signal to confirm the alignment, then we just might have a system that detects observable gravity information from that source. These binary rotating stars are essentially modulating gravity (opinion), but the detection of that modulation is the test that hasn't been passed yet. Bob.

insane_alien, The propagation speed of gravity is still an ongoing debate. See http://iopscience.iop.org/0004-637X/590/2/683/fulltext Bob. Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedinsane_alien, If gravity waves exist, wouldn't they be part of the electro-magnetic spectrum? And if not, then by what means can they be detected? Bob.

It is possible that gravity waves are at this time beyond our detectable range and will involve developing technology sufficiently sensitive to detect signals with frequencies with atto-second peak to peak periods. Laser technology is right now approaching this threshold of development. The learning curve for learning how to induce waves upon the gravity carrier will depend on discovering the primary and harmonic frequencies if they exist. Do you suppose these gravity waves that everyone is trying to detect just maybe have not been detected because we haven't dialed in the right frequency to tune into? They may have such a narrow bandwidth that we need to be dead on in order to notice them, similar to too rapidly rotating the dial on the radio and not noticing the stations that have the newer narrow bandwidths. Possibly we may have already discovered a harmonic of the main frequency but not recognized that fact. Anti-gravity effects have already been demonstrated with the levitating frogs using intense magnetic fields. It is possible that gravity waves are already changing magnetic fields in a detectable way and by using these intense magnetic fields as the detector, its a matter of tuning in to the right gravity wave frequency. Just some thoughts, Bob

By inducing waves upon this carrier of gravity, and tuning in to this induced wave frequency, information can then be transmitted faster than light. Bob.

insane_alien, Concerning your reply, At what point are these other frequencies responsive to optics such as a prisms or lenses? We know radio frequencies respond to surfaces and their contours such as parabolic dishes, and aircraft shapes, but where in the spectrum is the transition point where they start to respond to transparent optical materials. We know some materials are transparent to some frequencies, but opaque to others; the atmosphere being the example. Bob.

In the electromagnetic spectrum, as frequency increases, at what point do photons start being detected? And further beyond the ultraviolet, are they still photons? Are photons detected in the microwave region for example? How is light being the defined without photon action? Bob.

forufes, The term entropy may be used in different contexts to describe in mathematical terms the degree of which natural changes proceed toward their natural completion. This can be for instance, how much a football stadium seating fills up before the kickoff, or how fast the stadium clears after the game. In the descriptions of thermodynamics, the parameters are defined within which to describe the effects, thus the term "closed system" is used to define the boundaries within which the argument may be plied with the formulas, in order to have an understandable result. For an example; you are going to do an experiment on a table in the center of the room. You have all your apparatus, and notes, and everything you need ready for the experiment to begin. Your experiment is a simple one that will start with your momentary input to initiate the action, after which it will proceed to completion on its own. Now the entropy of the experiment is the description of how complete the experiment is. But in order to be a proper determination, a closed system has to be defined. The closed system is in this case: the door to the room is closed so no outside influences can affect it; no tampering with anything of the experiment until its completion. An open system would be: the door to the room is open so that air drafts, people walking in and out, outside noise, etc., may affect the experiment; other people and yourself make little tweeks to the apparatus and components that affect the progression of the experiment. As you can see, the open system would make the term entropy meaningless because the results for the original experiment parameters could not be determined. Thats why the term "closed system" has to be applied. How can someone determine how messy your room really is while you're home since it naturally tends toward total disorder (the entropy of your room, total disaster, entropy 100%), if your mother keeps coming in and straightening up (your room totally in order, entropy 0%), before your friends get there? Bob Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedforufes, Entropy, in thermodynamics, is a measure of the unavailability of a system’s energy to do work. Wikipedia. Reminds me of: Entropy, in teenagers, is a measure of the unavailability of their system’s energy to do work. :rolleyes:Bob

Consider this real world dilemma: Can you explain the light speed change that occurs when a laser beam exits a fiberoptic into a vacuum. Light speed has been shown to be slower when traversing through a material such as a fiber optic fiber, but at the exact boundary surface of the fiber optic as the light exits, the speed instantly is at the light speed in the vacuum. Is this instantaneous infinite acceleration of photons? Seems to be. See my crude illustration. Bob.

forufes, When it comes to living things, the earth can't be considered to be in a closed system, and therefore entropy can't be applied to the determination of the degree of order. Living things and life force imply a Creator, which is not allowed in the considering of closed systems. However if the life issue is ignored, and a closed system is allowed, then the state of entropy may be considered. This has nothing to do with religious beliefs. Bob

Mr. Skeptic, Where is a modern (within the last ten years) steam powered automobile in commercial production? Or a modern steam powered railroad locomotive? The ones in China are newly manufactured versions of the old technology. The same as the ones in Poland. Is anyone manufacturing steam powered electric generating systems for the home, installed, ready to run? I've seen Stirling engine designs that are for sale right now for co-generation. Heat pipes are something relatively new and my patent covers a design for that. Mike Browns steam engines are newly made old technology and are build it yourself systems. Where did you get the info on the steam efficiencies? I would also like to quote them if I find them. Still the overall advances in steam are well below the radar of public knowledge. Even the hightech solar mirror field steam power generating station that was the big deal at the time, where are the many plants they were predicted? Bob Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedinsane_alien, I have been intently following steam information for some time now, from its production plants, to heating and cooling, industrial processes, transportation, automobiles, etc. and that is why I am saying the advances you say are there, I haven't seen many of them. If they were a big advance we would be hearing more about them in the news or on the net to check out. I'm not talking about the backyard stuff you see on YOUTUBE, but real commercial grade equipment, engines, and systems. One improvement using steam is the six stroke cycle engine that is making such a hit on the drag race scene, but it is an improvement of the internal combustion engine. Diesel engines can achieve over 50% efficiencies but I have yet to see any efficiency rating for steam engines over 12%, mainly because of boiler design. Please show me the source if you find one. My patent was for the improvement of heat exchangers as well, because they haven't really changed in their construction since the last century. Power plants have improved some in the handling of the supercritical steam, but they are about the only efficient systems I've read about. But in general we're not even close to achieving the thermodynamic efficiencies you allude to. You guys have the net at your fingertips the same as I do. So check out the topic of steam engines, and steam things and discover for yourselves how relatively scarce the information is on any new steam technology. Regards, Bob

insane_alien, You forgot to shake it. Being obtuse? I have addressed every one of your objection directly with examples and diagrams and explanations. The soda water was added to introduce another gas, water vapor, and dissolved CO2, to address one of the previous posted objections, that you are now saying is irrelevent. Now how can the partial pressure reduce and still have the overall pressure be the same? It can't. The total pressure will be less, by your example. Your example of corrosion occurring under different gas pressures is introducing additional conditions that have different explanations for gas pressure changes. How about this grade school experiment? A burning candle is placed in the middle of a pan of water, and then a drinking glass is placed upside-down over the candle. The oxygen is consumed to CO2 creating a vacuum that draws the water up into the glass and extinguishes the candle. Now the vacuum area above the water contains water vapor, CO2, air, and a little remaining oxygen. Is this a suitable example showing consumption of oxygen in a container, comparable to your corrosion example? It is a little more dramatic. Yet even in this vacuum, the partial pressures of the remaining gasses cannot be determined. You keep referring to papers in journals and other sources to check out. We are only a few keystrokes away from these sources on the internet, if you would be so kind as to find one so that I may read it and maybe I can be convinced that your points are valid. Respectfully, Bob

Mr Skeptic, Saying that the steam industry is a developed technology, is analogous to saying that the computer industry is a developed technology. So why improve it if it is already developed? The Steam industry has basically been stagnate for many years, with nothing new to speak of. Boilers for instance are not very much improved since the turn of the last century. There have been some new innovations is the smaller steam generator units, but even they are too few to say its being a progressive industry. Heat exchangers and radiators have hardly changed at all since they were first made. Why? We can start a steam engine revolution right here on this forum, that will challenge readers and stimulate new ideas and research into the improvements needed to jump start this return to steam. Any takers to the challenge?