General > General Technical Chat

Electroboom: How Right IS Veritasium?! Don't Electrons Push Each Other??

<< < (109/148) > >>

electrodacus:

--- Quote from: Naej on July 14, 2022, 08:40:53 am ---Yeah one day there won't be wind.

--- End quote ---

I'm talking about minutes at most. The acceleration rate drops fast as there is not that much energy stored in pressure differential.


--- Quote from: Naej on July 14, 2022, 08:40:53 am ---Wrong. The earth will have 1/2*m*v² where v is vehicle speed. As m is much, much larger than the car mass, the earth will have a huuuuuge kinetic energy.
You applied again the conservation of energy, when it absolutely does not apply.

--- End quote ---
Conservation of energy always apply.
If there is no air friction so you ignore the air contribution the m in that equation will be the mass of the vehicle assuming the vehicle mass is smaller than earth mass.
So if you have a free rolling vehicle at say 10m/s and vehicle mass in 300kg all the energy you can extract from that (say you want to power a lamp with energy generate at the wheel) will be 0.5 * 300 * 102 = 15000Ws So say it is a 100W lamp and generator at the wheel is 100% efficient the lamp can be powered for 15000Ws / 100W = 150 seconds.
Earth mass has nothing to do with this as earth mass is just so much more massive and likely you used earth to get to that speed anyway so you just take back what you put in.



--- Quote from: Naej on July 14, 2022, 08:40:53 am ---No I simply didn't know that what you called "efficiency" can only be called COP. In any case, what matters is that you can reach a COP larger than 1.

--- End quote ---
There is a huge difference between efficiency and COP (they have nothing in common).
If you have one unit of energy say 1kWh you can convert that in to another form of energy but you will not get more than you put in so best case 1kWh
If you move energy from one place to another (pump) like move heat from inside the fridge to outside the fridge then that has nothing to do with energy conversion and thus that is measured as coefficient of performance.

A concrete example.
a) With 1kWh of electrical energy you can heat your house with 100% efficiency by dissipating that electrical energy as heat using a simple heating element.
so you converted one for of energy into another form and efficiency will never be higher than 100%
b) With same 1kWh provided to a heat pump you can heat up your house by pumping heat from outside the house to inside the house.
Say outside is +5C and inside is +20C and say outside volume of air is 10x larger than the volume inside you house (a huge exaggeration) but it is to make a point.
Say you heat the inside of the house from +20C to +25C using that 1kWh to pump heat from outside to inside and say the COP if 3 for heating meaning 3kWh where delivered to the house the 1kWh you used for pumping heat and 2kWh taken from outside.
Now the outside temperature will be only +4.666C
So as you see conservation of energy is valid is just that you moved energy from outside the house to inside (thus the name heat pump).
COP of 3 exist and has nothing to do with 300% efficiency that does not exist.


--- Quote from: Naej on July 14, 2022, 08:40:53 am ---In my world, energy conservation is real, however it's based on serious physics so it has nothing to do with what you call "conservation of energy".

--- End quote ---
As shown in the example above your worldview is flawed.


--- Quote from: Naej on July 14, 2022, 08:40:53 am ---Anyway, you yet again showed that you can't even properly handle a different reference frame. Clearly you know exactly nothing in mechanics so just stop talking about mechanics.

--- End quote ---

Changing reference will not change the result. Result is the same in all reference frames if you know what changing a reference frame means.
Many people not just you change reference frames without considering the consequences of that and thus come with wrong conclusions. 

Naej:

--- Quote from: electrodacus on July 14, 2022, 03:40:01 pm ---
--- Quote from: Naej on July 14, 2022, 08:40:53 am ---Yeah one day there won't be wind.

--- End quote ---

I'm talking about minutes at most. The acceleration rate drops fast as there is not that much energy stored in pressure differential.

--- End quote ---
Stop making stuff up.

--- Quote from: electrodacus on July 14, 2022, 03:40:01 pm ---
--- Quote from: Naej on July 14, 2022, 08:40:53 am ---Wrong. The earth will have 1/2*m*v² where v is vehicle speed. As m is much, much larger than the car mass, the earth will have a huuuuuge kinetic energy.
You applied again the conservation of energy, when it absolutely does not apply.

--- End quote ---
Conservation of energy always apply.
If there is no air friction so you ignore the air contribution the m in that equation will be the mass of the vehicle assuming the vehicle mass is smaller than earth mass.
So if you have a free rolling vehicle at say 10m/s and vehicle mass in 300kg all the energy you can extract from that (say you want to power a lamp with energy generate at the wheel) will be 0.5 * 300 * 102 = 15000Ws So say it is a 100W lamp and generator at the wheel is 100% efficient the lamp can be powered for 15000Ws / 100W = 150 seconds.
Earth mass has nothing to do with this as earth mass is just so much more massive and likely you used earth to get to that speed anyway so you just take back what you put in.

--- End quote ---
No in the vehicle reference frame the Earth of mass m has kinetic 1/2*m*v².


--- Quote from: electrodacus on July 14, 2022, 03:40:01 pm ---
--- Quote from: Naej on July 14, 2022, 08:40:53 am ---Anyway, you yet again showed that you can't even properly handle a different reference frame. Clearly you know exactly nothing in mechanics so just stop talking about mechanics.

--- End quote ---

Changing reference will not change the result. Result is the same in all reference frames if you know what changing a reference frame means.
Many people not just you change reference frames without considering the consequences of that and thus come with wrong conclusions.

--- End quote ---
Yes, you just showed it once more that you don't know what happens to energy what you change reference frame.

--- Quote from: electrodacus on July 14, 2022, 03:40:01 pm ---So as you see conservation of energy is valid is just that you moved energy from outside the house to inside (thus the name heat pump).
COP of 3 exist and has nothing to do with 300% efficiency that does not exist.

--- End quote ---
I know.
Which is why when you take 100W to the wheels and get from the propeller 300W to the car, you have a COP of 3.
Yet you talked about efficiency, which according to you, is absolutely wrong. And you wrongly assumed that the COP could at most be 1.

electrodacus:

--- Quote from: Naej on July 14, 2022, 08:02:29 pm ---
--- Quote from: electrodacus on July 14, 2022, 03:40:01 pm ---
--- Quote from: Naej on July 14, 2022, 08:40:53 am ---Yeah one day there won't be wind.

--- End quote ---

I'm talking about minutes at most. The acceleration rate drops fast as there is not that much energy stored in pressure differential.

--- End quote ---
Stop making stuff up.

--- Quote from: electrodacus on July 14, 2022, 03:40:01 pm ---
--- Quote from: Naej on July 14, 2022, 08:40:53 am ---Wrong. The earth will have 1/2*m*v² where v is vehicle speed. As m is much, much larger than the car mass, the earth will have a huuuuuge kinetic energy.
You applied again the conservation of energy, when it absolutely does not apply.

--- End quote ---
Conservation of energy always apply.
If there is no air friction so you ignore the air contribution the m in that equation will be the mass of the vehicle assuming the vehicle mass is smaller than earth mass.
So if you have a free rolling vehicle at say 10m/s and vehicle mass in 300kg all the energy you can extract from that (say you want to power a lamp with energy generate at the wheel) will be 0.5 * 300 * 102 = 15000Ws So say it is a 100W lamp and generator at the wheel is 100% efficient the lamp can be powered for 15000Ws / 100W = 150 seconds.
Earth mass has nothing to do with this as earth mass is just so much more massive and likely you used earth to get to that speed anyway so you just take back what you put in.

--- End quote ---
No in the vehicle reference frame the Earth of mass m has kinetic 1/2*m*v².


--- Quote from: electrodacus on July 14, 2022, 03:40:01 pm ---
--- Quote from: Naej on July 14, 2022, 08:40:53 am ---Anyway, you yet again showed that you can't even properly handle a different reference frame. Clearly you know exactly nothing in mechanics so just stop talking about mechanics.

--- End quote ---

Changing reference will not change the result. Result is the same in all reference frames if you know what changing a reference frame means.
Many people not just you change reference frames without considering the consequences of that and thus come with wrong conclusions.

--- End quote ---
Yes, you just showed it once more that you don't know what happens to energy what you change reference frame.

--- Quote from: electrodacus on July 14, 2022, 03:40:01 pm ---So as you see conservation of energy is valid is just that you moved energy from outside the house to inside (thus the name heat pump).
COP of 3 exist and has nothing to do with 300% efficiency that does not exist.

--- End quote ---
I know.
Which is why when you take 100W to the wheels and get from the propeller 300W to the car, you have a COP of 3.
Yet you talked about efficiency, which according to you, is absolutely wrong. And you wrongly assumed that the COP could at most be 1.

--- End quote ---

I have nothing to add. You are beyond hope in my professional opinion.
That is unless you are an adult and still have time to learn how things work in this universe.

Naej:

--- Quote from: electrodacus on July 14, 2022, 08:09:52 pm ---I have nothing to add. You are beyond hope in my professional opinion.
That is unless you are an adult and still have time to learn how things work in this universe.

--- End quote ---
Of course you won't convince me of this weird physics you invented.
A simple change of reference frame and you are already too confused to be able to compute the kinetic energy, clearly you won't teach physics any time soon.
It's time for you to understand that it's not you the only person who managed to reveal the truth about blackbird, but rather that you don't understand energy and should read high school physics textbooks.
The sooner the better.

electrodacus:

--- Quote from: Naej on July 14, 2022, 09:13:26 pm ---Of course you won't convince me of this weird physics you invented.
A simple change of reference frame and you are already too confused to be able to compute the kinetic energy, clearly you won't teach physics any time soon.
It's time for you to understand that it's not you the only person who managed to reveal the truth about blackbird, but rather that you don't understand energy and should read high school physics textbooks.
The sooner the better.

--- End quote ---

Everything you responded in the previous post was wrong so there is no place for me to start.
You just live in a fantasy world and get basic physics concepts wrong.
And yes claiming that the 100W input mechanical power taken at the wheel becomes 300W at propeller is pure fantasy with no proof in real world.
And since for some reason you believe Derek's description of how this works you need to come up with this sort of phantasy else the math will not work out.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod