1

Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Why don

« on: 07/11/2015 20:59:25 »

In properly answering this question, one must delve into Quantum Field Theory a bit.

All throughout the universe is a field, called the Quantum Vacuum Zero Point Energy field. It is the energy that has entropied to its lowest energy state, its "ground state". With more energy continually being "generated" from mass (via stars), and thus entropied, there is a continual "filling" of the universe's "bowl" of entropied energy. This Zero Point Energy is where mass came from, and it accounts for why the universe is expanding (QVZPE field density is increasing as more energy entropies, thus field radiation pressure is increasing, thus the universe must either create mass or expand to relieve that field radiation pressure, and it's energetically more conservative at this time to expand. Earlier in the universe's existence, it was energetically more conservative to concretize mass, accounting for that 1 billionth of 1% of all energy coming from the Big Bang being turned into the mass we have today).

According to Quantum Field Theory, everything is a wave... both massive entities and massless. What we see as "matter" is considered a relatively stable wave form in the Quantum Vacuum Zero Point Energy field, and those "virtual particles" that we've been told continually pop in and out of existence are unstable "pulses" in the QVZPE field density. Those "virtual particles" exist, it's just that they exist for such a short time before they settle back into the Zero Point Energy field that we call them "virtual". In fact, researchers at Chalmers University in 2011 "concretized" microwave photons directly from the QVZPE field using what is known as Dynamical Casimir Effect, thereby proving that these particles (which in Quantum Field Theory are considered waves) actually exist... it's just that their wave forms aren't stable enough to remain "concretized" for long. If a large enough differential in ZPE were to come about (ie: a "surge" in the ZPE, much like a wave of entropied energy), mass could be concretized. If the universe were to somehow stop expanding and the QVZPE field radiation pressure built up sufficiently, mass would be concretized.

The atom's nucleus is made up protons and neutrons, held together with the Strong Nuclear Force. The electrons aren't "billiard balls" whizzing about the nucleus, they're actually standing waves "orbiting" the nucleus. Because the electron must have an integer number (ie: round number) of De Broglie waves in its wavelength, this accounts for the Bohr orbit radius. As an electron absorbs energy, when it's absorbed enough energy that it can add additional De Broglie waves to its wavelength, it "jumps outward" in its orbit. When the electron gives off energy (as it is always doing) in trying to reach its lowest energy state, it sheds De Broglie waves in its standing wave orbit, gives off a photon that has the exact same amount of energy as the number of waves shed, and reduces the radius of its "orbit". If an electron's standing wave "orbit" didn't have an integer number of De Broglie waves in its wavelength, destructive interference would occur, and the "orbit" would not be stable.

Now, I said above that the electron is always giving off energy in attempting to reach its ground state. What stops the electron from giving off enough energy that it becomes attracted to the proton? The QVZPE field, of course. It's the "ground state", the lowest a system can go, thus the electrons have a minimum number of De Broglie waves in their standing wave orbits which they can drop to.

This has been known (well, suspected... and proven later) since 1975, when Boyer showed that the hydrogen atom in its ground state (ie: lowest orbit) would be in a state of equilibrium between Larmor radiation and absorption of QVZPE at the correct radius for a classical Rutherford hydrogen atom.

So now you know where our matter came from, why our matter is stable, the basis behind Bohr orbits, and why our universe is expanding. And it's all underpinned by Quantum Vacuum Zero Point Energy.

That said, there are instances when the electron does "crash into" the proton... it's called electron capture decay. It turns the proton into a neutron and causes transmutation. You can cause forced electron capture decay if an atom is placed into a reduced QVZPE field environment sufficient to reduce the number of De Broglie waves in the electron's orbit such that the electron is attracted to the proton.

2

Technology / Re: Does hydrogen and oxygen fed to a petrol engine improve performance?

« on: 14/10/2015 18:18:36 »

I have a theory about why some people experience an increase in fuel efficiency when feeding HHO into the intake of their engines... the HHO isn't... at least, it's not all HHO. It's actually a mix of HHO and vapor carrying hydroxide (OH^-) radicals into the engine.

The two main processes during combustion are below. You'll note that water (and specifically the hydroxide radical derived from water) is essential for combustion to even take place:

This process occurs at higher temperatures:
OH^- + H ==> H₂O
H₂O + O ==> H₂O₂
H₂O₂ ==> OH^- + OH^-

This process dominates at lower temperatures, and competes with the above process at higher temperatures:
OO + H ==> HOO
HOO + H ==> H₂O₂
H₂O₂ ==> OH^- + OH^-

The above two mechanisms are very active at stripping hydrogen from the hydrocarbon fuel.

Now consider that we're not just burning hydrogen in the engine... if the hydrogen combustion process finishes fast enough (ie: before the exhaust valve opens), we get to burn CO to CO₂:

The above two processes strip the hydrogen from the hydrocarbon fuel, leaving behind the carbon, which combines with oxygen to form carbon monoxide:
C + O ==> CO

Because the two processes above are competing with the C => CO => CO₂ process for oxygen, and they're faster, the only method really left to convert CO to CO₂ is via hydroxides.

CO + OH^- ==> CO₂ + H
H + OH^- ==> H₂0
H₂O + O ==> H₂O₂
H₂O₂ ==> OH^- + OH^-
Go to top and repeat.

As you can see, the hydroxide radical plays an important role in converting carbon monoxide to carbon dioxide, as well. And that process adds additional heat which can be converted to additional work.

So, my theory is that the HHO fed into the engine aids rapid completion of hydrocarbon combustion such that the CO => CO₂ process can take place before the exhaust valve opens, adding additional heat to the cylinder, which is extracted as work.

Of course, there's no need to expend all the electricity to generate the HHO... putting a voltage across a container of water such that the voltage doesn't exceed the water's ionization constant merely divides the water into OH^- (hydroxide) and H₃O (hydronium) (ie: the low pH and high pH constituents of water).

So putting just enough voltage across the water to cause that separation of the water into its high and low pH components (but not so high a voltage that you exceed the ionization constant of the water by much, thus keeping current to negligible levels, and not splitting the water into hydrogen and oxygen), then pumping from the OH^- side of your water tank and injecting that hydroxide rich water into your engine will jump-start the combustion process (because the hydroxide already exists, it doesn't need to be split from water in-cylinder, thereby skipping two steps as outlined above and immediately commencing with stripping hydrogen from the hydrocarbon fuel and burning it), thus allowing the hydrocarbon burn to complete faster, thus allowing the CO => CO₂ burn to initiate faster, thus adding to cylinder heat, thus increasing efficiency.

3

Technology / Re: Does hydrogen and oxygen fed to a petrol engine improve performance?

« on: 08/08/2015 05:14:49 »

Here's the news story:
http://pesn.com/2010/06/18/9501662_water-fuel-research_Explosion_kills_inventor/

4

Technology / Re: How does the Dyson fan work?

« on: 04/08/2015 12:53:16 »

Sorry, I didn't make it clear. The two black objects in the cross-over ducts are the radiators.

The engine exhaust will be piped to the back of the bike and into a Coanda Effect nozzle (where the fan in the Dyson unit would be). The engine exhaust will then drag the air out of the engine compartment (which is pushed in via the venturi scoop at the front of the bike) into the wake of the bike.

The Dyson fan only pushes about 42 CFM. My engine pushes upwards of 67 CFM at WOT, so the Coanda Effect nozzle I'll be using will be about the same size as the Dyson fan's.

5

Technology / Re: Does Environment Affect Miles Per Gallon ?

« on: 04/08/2015 08:17:23 »

You will get less MPG on hot or dry days. A certain degree of humidity aids combustion (don't ask me why) and on cooler days more air enters the engine, increasing pressure slightly; although I'm not sure if that holds true for turbo- or supercharged engines.

I've found just the opposite to be true... my engine runs much stronger on hot days, my fuel economy is much better on hot days, and fuel economy plummets on very cold days. Perhaps because the coolant temperature control on most engines is pretty rudimentary (I mean really, we're in the 21st century, and we're still using bypass thermostats to control engine temperature?).

The reason humidity aids combustion is because water is a part of and a product of combustion.

http://not2fast.com/thermo/water_injection/water_chemistry.txt

To quote part of that post:
=========================
The highest energy particles are the hydrogen atoms - and they penetrate the charge about 5 times as far as the rest of the particles.  As they lose energy and return to normal temps - about 5000 k - they begin to react chemically with any surrounding fuel and oxygen particles. The effectiveness of spark ignition is directly related to the availability of free hydrogen. Molecules containing tightly bound hydrogen such as methanol, nitromethane, and methane are far more difficult to ignite than those with less bonds.

During combustion - water - H₂O ( present and formed ) is extremely active in the oxidation of the hydrocarbon. The predominate reaction is the following:

   OH^-  + H ==> H₂O
   H₂O + O ==> H₂O₂
   H₂O₂    ==> OH^- + OH^-
   Loop to top and repeat.

The OH^- radical is the most effective at stripping hydrogen from the HC molecule in most ranges of combustion temperature.

Another predominate process is the HOO radical. It is more active at lower temperatures and is competitive with the H₂O₂ at higher temps.

   OO  + H ==> HOO
   HOO + H ==> H₂O₂
   H₂O₂    ==> OH^- + OH^-

This mechanism is very active at both stripping hydrogen from the HC and for getting O₂ into usable combustion reactions.

Next consider the combustion of CO. Virtually no C ==> CO₂. It's a two step process.  C+O ==> CO. CO virtually drops out of early mid combustion as the O / H reactions are significantly faster and effectively compete for the available oxygen.

Then consider that pure CO and pure O₂ burns very slowly if at all. Virtually the only mechanism to complete the oxidization ( Glassman - Combustion Third Edition ) of CO ==> CO₂ is the "water method".

   CO  + OH^- ==> CO₂ + H
   H   + OH^- ==> H₂0
   H₂O + O  ==> H₂O₂
   H₂O₂     ==> OH^-  + OH^-
   goto to top and repeat.
=========================

So if we were able to put a current through a water tank at just enough voltage to differentiate the water into its OH^- (hydroxide) and H₃O⁺ (hydronium) components (ie: separate the low and high pH components of the water) without actually dissociating the water, then pump from the OH^- side of the tank and inject that OH^- into the engine along with the fuel, we'd greatly increase combustion efficiency without having to go to the bother of running high amps to actually dissociate the water.

6

Technology / Re: What is the advantage of silver spark plugs?

« on: 04/08/2015 07:41:58 »

LeeE is right. Variations on an aged theme utilizing different metals that have no discernible difference in the operation of the engine.

A few observations from what I've learned:
1) Those needle-fine Iridium plugs don't work so well with waste-spark systems. A waste-spark system generally fires two cylinders from one coil, and fires once to initiate the power stroke, and once during the exhaust stroke (the waste spark in the exhausting cylinder). It does this by routing the positive side of the coil through one plug, and the negative through the other, each time it sparks, it actually is firing two plugs in series.

The problem is that those needle-fine Iridium plugs have different characteristics than other plugs... one is that they require a lower forward voltage to fire because sharp objects have a higher surface charge and thus they ionize the surrounding atmosphere more readily, creating a channel to conduct the spark to ground. Conversely, the reverse voltage (on the waste spark) requires higher voltage because you're going from the flat J-strap electrode to the pointy center electrode. That gives you two distinct disadvantages... the lower forward voltage means a weaker but longer duration spark than you'd get from a non-Iridium plug, and the higher reverse voltage means it works your coil harder. My bike definitely did not like its Iridium plug. Ran rougher, didn't have as much power, and fuel economy dropped a good bit.

2) I've tried pretty much every type of plug out there in trying to get rid of a cold rough idle on my bike. In diagnosing the problem, I knew it was due to not lighting enough of the fuel when the engine was cold to get a stable idle (it's an ECU-controlled fuel-injected bike that doesn't like the ethanol in our gas, so there's not much I can do to change things). The only plug that completely cured the rough idle was the Pulstar HE1HT9 plug. The first start-up after I put it in, the engine idled at about 2450 RPM (it normally idles at 1700 RPM, the idle speed is controlled by the ECU) for the first 5 minutes until the ECU dialed back the idle air bypass valve to slow the idle down... so the plug made combustion more efficient, for sure. It wasn't "cold idle" that made it run fast, that only goes to 2000 RPM on this bike and only lasts about 10 seconds.

7

Technology / Re: How much free oxygen does the exhaust gas from my gas boiler contain?

« on: 04/08/2015 06:50:16 »

Old thread, I know, but information like this doesn't go out of style.

The boilers at work run with 3.7% exhaust oxygen. These aren't really "boilers" in the traditional sense, they're giant water heaters, more or less... they heat water at about 575 GPM from the 200 degree F return temperature to anywhere upwards of 320 degrees F.

The discharge water temperature varies because our boilers are designed to maintain a constant return water temperature.

8

Technology / Re: How does the Dyson fan work?

« on: 04/08/2015 06:23:43 »

Coanda Effect... the tendency for air to "stick" to nearby surfaces, and to be dragged along with a separate moving air stream.

I've been researching this for use in a different application... I'll be building a trellis frame for my bike soon (a high-fuel-efficiency project), along with an aerodynamic body. Part of making the bike aerodynamic will be having a venturi scoop opening at the front of the bike to duct the air that is stalled there to the back of the bike (and thereby alleviate some of the pressure drag).

That air will go through the engine compartment and will be used to cool things in there (although it won't be used to cool the radiators, two separate ducts will be used for that, the ducts that help to alleviate cross-wind effects on the aerodynamic body). That heated (and thus expanded) air will then go through a Coanda nozzle much like in the Dyson fans (except made of metal), which will be powered via the engine exhaust, and will exit into the wake of the bike (thus filling the wake and helping to alleviate wake drag).



It's hoped that doing things this way will not only act to reduce pressure and wake drag, but will actually provide a bit of thrust, although there's no way to tell if it will until it's tried.

9

Technology / Re: Is it better to use the engine to decelerate?

« on: 04/08/2015 03:03:54 »

"Actually, that would reduce your stopping distance if you could ever get the tires to spin backwards - it would work like a dragster in reverse."
No it would not spinning the wheels would lead to reduced adhesion the best braking effect is acheived when the wheels are are still rotating at a rate appropriate for the speed of the vehicle.

Actually, the best traction is achieved with some wheel slippage. Racers use this knowledge all the time. The problem is, after you reach this maximum traction:wheel slippage ratio, the traction falls off, which puts you into a slide (in a turn) or just smokes your tires (in straight line acceleration) or puts you into a skid (when braking). The trick is to ride as close as possible to the ideal ratio, without going over it.
http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/5838/why-does-a-tire-produce-more-traction-when-sliding-slightly

10

Technology / Re: How can we build better bearings?

« on: 04/08/2015 02:39:46 »

Ceramic bearings are the way to go. I installed them in the wheels and gears of my scooter, the thing rolls so easily now it's amazing. Before the new bearings, if you grabbed the rear wheel and gave it a good spin, it'd spin maybe 3/4 of a turn. Now it'll spin 3 full turns. And that's with rear gears that are taller than the original ones.

What slows it down now is having to spin the rear gears, whereas before it was a combination of having to spin the rear gears and bearing drag.

The bearings I got were micro-polished and tungsten disulfide coated... very low friction. I got them without any grease in them, and put Royal Purple grease mixed with tungsten disulfide (in the bearings that took grease). For the bearings that are lubricated with oil, I put tungsten disulfide in the oil (which also lowers friction in the gears).

11

Technology / Re: Should an exhaust pipe be painted black or silver to best radiate heat?

« on: 04/08/2015 02:28:23 »

You want your exhaust to retain as much of its heat as is possible right up to the exhaust tip. This keeps exhaust gas density lower, exhaust velocity higher, and helps the engine to scavenge better (and helps the cat to operate more efficiently for those that are mounted further back on the car). Coating the exterior of the exhaust pipe with a ceramic coating will not only protect the metal, but will accomplish the aforementioned goals. Coating the inside will do so as well, but to a greater degree.

There are several companies doing this, but only a few that can also coat the inside of the pipe.

12

Technology / Re: Does hydrogen and oxygen fed to a petrol engine improve performance?

« on: 04/08/2015 01:13:16 »

Compressing HHO is a big no-no. It tends to explosively recombine. The end result may be just water, but that explosion tends to make a mess. There's a guy in southern California who was experimenting with compressing HHO... he blew the building he was in apart and deaded himself.

13

General Science / Re: When driving a truck in windy conditions, what speed is safest?

« on: 02/08/2015 22:31:26 »

I know this is an old topic, but I have some interesting information to add. I've been researching much the same thing, but with an aim at cancelling side-wind forces for a motorcycle via "stalling the wing"... using cross-over ducting to cancel lift for a fully-faired motorcycle.

I created a spreasheet that calculated the effective wind speed and angle based upon actual wind speed at a worst-case 90 degree angle from vehicle direction of travel, and vehicle speed.

See the attached PNG file. I can't attach the spreadsheet, it's not an allowed file, so I took a screenshot of the speeds most likely used in driving or riding.

 [ Invalid Attachment ]

In it, the topmost row is the vehicle's forward speed. The leftmost column is actual wind speed hitting the vehicle at a 90 degree angle. The data in the cells is effective wind speed and angle.

The upshot is that you do want to "outrun" the wind to minimize the angle at which the effective wind is hitting the vehicle (and thus the force of the wind hitting the vehicle at a close to 90 degree angle), but if you go too fast, the angle will be small enough that the vehicle body will act as an effective wing and produce "lift", which is much worse, since the effective wind speed is always faster than vehicle speed and much faster than actual wind speed.

So, you have to somehow figure out what the "stall angle" of your vehicle is, and attempt to maintain a road speed which is faster than the wind, and that will keep the wind at a shallow angle to the vehicle, but not so shallow that the "wing" is no longer stalled.