Over-unity, a Novel attempt.

reply to post by ken10


It will never work because no machine will ever be 100% efficient it's as simple as that!

wmd_2008
reply to post by ken10

 

It will never work because no machine will ever be 100% efficient it's as simple as that!

I think with the submersible concept nothing has to be 100%....I maybe wrong though.

ken10

wmd_2008
reply to post by ken10

 

It will never work because no machine will ever be 100% efficient it's as simple as that!

I think with the submersible concept nothing has to be 100%....I maybe wrong though.

People NEVER take into account how the energy in the system is changed for instance the pulley wheel will have friction and air resistance if it makes a noise some of the energy has been used to make the sound that's just one item of your machine.

wmd_2008

ken10

wmd_2008
reply to post by ken10

 

It will never work because no machine will ever be 100% efficient it's as simple as that!

I think with the submersible concept nothing has to be 100%....I maybe wrong though.

People NEVER take into account how the energy in the system is changed for instance the pulley wheel will have friction and air resistance if it makes a noise some of the energy has been used to make the sound that's just one item of your machine.

I understand that.

Normally if a ball falls of a 3ft table it takes the same amount of energy PLUS a little extra to overcome gravity and friction to get the ball back up to that 3ft table.

However we are now talking about a ball falling say 6ft, 10ft, 50ft but now only needs to make it back 1cm..... because once it can do that it can take it as high as you like !!!

ken10

wmd_2008

ken10

wmd_2008
reply to post by ken10

 

It will never work because no machine will ever be 100% efficient it's as simple as that!

I think with the submersible concept nothing has to be 100%....I maybe wrong though.

People NEVER take into account how the energy in the system is changed for instance the pulley wheel will have friction and air resistance if it makes a noise some of the energy has been used to make the sound that's just one item of your machine.

I understand that.

Normally if a ball falls of a 3ft table it takes the same amount of energy PLUS a little extra to overcome gravity and friction to get the ball back up to that 3ft table.

However we are now talking about a ball falling say 6ft, 10ft, 50ft but now only needs to make it back 1cm..... because once it can do that it can take it as high as you like !!!

edit on 2-12-2013 by ken10 because: (no reason given)

How!!!

Think about it you have to DROP the ball to produce the current to work the pump to produce air so your float is rising but the ball is at the bottom but the part that held the ball had to be at the top for the ball to drop ????

Something wrong there right at the start!!!

wmd_2008

ken10

wmd_2008

ken10

wmd_2008
reply to post by ken10

 

It will never work because no machine will ever be 100% efficient it's as simple as that!

I think with the submersible concept nothing has to be 100%....I maybe wrong though.

People NEVER take into account how the energy in the system is changed for instance the pulley wheel will have friction and air resistance if it makes a noise some of the energy has been used to make the sound that's just one item of your machine.

I understand that.

Normally if a ball falls of a 3ft table it takes the same amount of energy PLUS a little extra to overcome gravity and friction to get the ball back up to that 3ft table.

However we are now talking about a ball falling say 6ft, 10ft, 50ft but now only needs to make it back 1cm..... because once it can do that it can take it as high as you like !!!

edit on 2-12-2013 by ken10 because: (no reason given)

How!!!

edit on 2-12-2013 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)

Because it only needs to activate an air pump that will release air bubbles underneath a submersible that will use those air bubbles to rise to the surface....resetting the system

wmd_2008
Think about it you have to DROP the ball to produce the current to work the pump to produce air so your float is rising but the ball is at the bottom but the part that held the ball had to be at the top for the ball to drop ????

Something wrong there right at the start!!!

As the submersible rises it is attached by line over the pulley thus lowering the catcher tray that will receive the ball at the bottom.

ken10

wmd_2008

ken10

wmd_2008

ken10

wmd_2008
reply to post by ken10

 

It will never work because no machine will ever be 100% efficient it's as simple as that!

I think with the submersible concept nothing has to be 100%....I maybe wrong though.

People NEVER take into account how the energy in the system is changed for instance the pulley wheel will have friction and air resistance if it makes a noise some of the energy has been used to make the sound that's just one item of your machine.

I understand that.

Normally if a ball falls of a 3ft table it takes the same amount of energy PLUS a little extra to overcome gravity and friction to get the ball back up to that 3ft table.

However we are now talking about a ball falling say 6ft, 10ft, 50ft but now only needs to make it back 1cm..... because once it can do that it can take it as high as you like !!!

edit on 2-12-2013 by ken10 because: (no reason given)

How!!!

edit on 2-12-2013 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)

Because it only needs to activate an air pump that will release air bubbles underneath a submersible that will use those air bubbles to rise to the surface....resetting the system

How does it collect the ball? the part that held the ball is at the top when the ball drops so the ball will be on the surface so how does it get back in the holder also you have to overcome the inertia in the motor system of the pump, the friction and sound or heat generated has come from your potential energy at the top so you have lost all that!

It can never work basic science tells you that!

ken10

wmd_2008

ken10

wmd_2008

ken10

wmd_2008
reply to post by ken10

 

It will never work because no machine will ever be 100% efficient it's as simple as that!

I think with the submersible concept nothing has to be 100%....I maybe wrong though.

People NEVER take into account how the energy in the system is changed for instance the pulley wheel will have friction and air resistance if it makes a noise some of the energy has been used to make the sound that's just one item of your machine.

I understand that.

Normally if a ball falls of a 3ft table it takes the same amount of energy PLUS a little extra to overcome gravity and friction to get the ball back up to that 3ft table.

However we are now talking about a ball falling say 6ft, 10ft, 50ft but now only needs to make it back 1cm..... because once it can do that it can take it as high as you like !!!

edit on 2-12-2013 by ken10 because: (no reason given)

How!!!

edit on 2-12-2013 by wmd_2008 because: (no reason given)

Because it only needs to activate an air pump that will release air bubbles underneath a submersible that will use those air bubbles to rise to the surface....resetting the system

Do you realize how much the "submersible" is going to have to weigh to bring the ball bearing back up to the top? It's going to weigh about just as much as the difference between the buoyancy and the help of bringing the submersible back to the top, but far less.

It's a closed system. At no point is it "over unity".

Calculate the weight of the bearing.
Calculate the amount of energy the bearing can provide on its way down.
Calculate the amount of air pumped by the pump using the energy provided.
Calculate the weight of the "submersible" which will have to weight enough to bring the bearing back up.
Calculate the amount of air needed to push up the ultra heavy submersible (compared to the bearing)

Then calculate losses in efficiency for the pulley, energy conversion potential to kinetic/electrical etc.

There are a few more calculations you can do, but that should be sufficient to tell you this doesn't work. And it's a perpetual motion machine. "over unity" is just a misunderstanding between kinetic and potential energy. (by yours and other definitions)

reply to post by ken10


I get where you are going with it and the principle is kind of clever, but divers don't get a free lift when they do it that way- the air pump does all the work that a hoist would have to do, just in the opposite direction and effectively "geared down"- but sooner or later you do have to push water out of the way to make room for air- like trying to mouth-inflate a pool toy when your kid is already jumping up and down on it.

Now what you could do is use a buoy that always has the same amount of fluid in it but can vary in volume- no pumping required- structure the tank so that one side is warm and one side is cold like a sterling motor, and the buoy will change density as it changes temperature and go through a cycle of sinking and rising, perhaps with some small capacity for work, and you're not violating thermodynamics, you're just gathering fuel from a practically inexhaustible supply (ambient heat- there is always some, and the smaller your scale the machine and more efficient you make it, the lower the level of ambient heat needed for it to run).

You could place magnets on said buoy and a coil around the tank and it would probably produce power, and you could use that power to assist the heating and cooling, basically running the machine faster with no practical use for show- it would just be this thing that is gonna sit there rising and falling for as long as there isn't an iceage and nothing breaks.

reply to post by ken10


making the following assumptions :

1 - mass of ball bearing = 1.0 kg

2 - efficiency of all mechanical systems = 100%


I will give you some figures

the mass of your " submersible " must be > 1.01 kg- to recover the bearing

the mass of water that must be displaced to make the " submersible " ascend the water tube must be >1.01

the air supply must deliver > 1.01 litres of air to displace this water [ the real figure is higher due to water pressure and gas compressibility ]

thus explain how your bearing is going to generate sufficient elictricty by falling - to drive the air pump

ignorant_ape
reply to post by ken10

 

thus explain how your bearing is going to generate sufficient electricity by falling - to drive the air pump

I was going to ask this question as well. First you need to figure out how much is the absolute minimum that it takes to power your air pump. Then figure out how many coils you need to use to provide more than what is required by your air pump.

Also I'm sure somebody has already pointed out that any surface contacting another reduces the efficiency coefficient of your design. A pulley system needs an axle and air causes friction, etc. All this aside it does simply fall back upon how much power do you need and how much power can you make.

I wish you luck! Thinkers are why we have anything today.

EDIT: Because my ability to put letters together after I get tired drops off dramatically.

reply to post by ignorant_ape


Thank you for saying what I was trying to say but not getting tongue tied.

Hey wannabee engnrs, instead of a thought expt.,drop a magnet
thru a coil and get some leds to light up, just for kicks.
Then take it from there

reply to post by Angelic Resurrection


Your lack of imagination has been duly noted. The conversation is still sound enough, provided we aren't planning to run any important systems on this technology, ever.

boncho
You have a flawed premise. Define "over unity" first.

In fact i would suggest that you start and define both perpetual motion ( which i guess presumes no friction and perhaps truly impossible perpetual motion) as well as over unity. If you truly believe that these terms can be used interchangeably perhaps i can help you resolve that state of ignorance/spite...

Stellar

Angelic Resurrection
Hey wannabee engnrs, instead of a thought expt.,drop a magnet
thru a coil and get some leds to light up, just for kicks.
Then take it from there

What like this...



Shake type design

This design contains a linear electrical generator which charges a batterylike ultracapacitor when the flashlight is shaken lengthwise. The battery or capacitor powers a white LED lamp. The linear generator consists of a sliding rare earth magnet which moves back and forth through the center of a solenoid, a coil of copper wire, when it is shaken. A current is induced in the loops of wire by Faraday's law of induction each time the magnet slides through, which charges the capacitor.
An ultra-capacitor is used instead of a rechargeable battery since it doesn't wear out as much as a battery. This, along with the long-life LED lamp which doesn't burn out like an incandescent bulb, can give the flashlight a long lifetime, making it a useful emergency light. A disadvantage of many current models is that the ultracapacitor can't store much energy, limiting the operating time per charge. In most designs, vigorously shaking the light for about thirty seconds may provide up to five minutes of light, though the light may become dim after 2 or 3 minutes. Shaking the unit for 10 to 15 seconds every 2 or 3 minutes as necessary permits the device to be used continuously. It is often viewed as a toy, or an emergency backup for other flashlights.

Source

ignorant_ape
reply to post by ken10

 

making the following assumptions :

1 - mass of ball bearing = 1.0 kg

2 - efficiency of all mechanical systems = 100%


I will give you some figures

the mass of your " submersible " must be > 1.01 kg- to recover the bearing

the mass of water that must be displaced to make the " submersible " ascend the water tube must be >1.01

the air supply must deliver > 1.01 litres of air to displace this water [ the real figure is higher due to water pressure and gas compressibility ]

thus explain how your bearing is going to generate sufficient elictricty by falling - to drive the air pump

Are we not forgetting the velocity of the ball, which means the ball weighs more on its way down than it does on its way up ?

It is this imbalance that I was trying to exploit...and btw I have no intention of building anything (my health doesn't allow it) this is purely an idea that I had and didn't know the answers to.

But thanks for the input

reply to post by The Vagabond


Thanks for your input, you are the only one it seems to have taking this seriously with thoughtful replies.

I had an idea, I didn't know the answers to, so I posted it here for some friendly discussion...I think overall that was a mistake.