• Welcome to engineeringclicks.com
  • What follows is an off-the-wall idea

    Discussion in 'The Leisure Lounge' started by Justcurioustwo, Nov 9, 2019.

    1. s.weinberg

      s.weinberg Well-Known Member EngineeringClicks Expert

      Joined:
      Nov 2012
      Posts:
      253
      Likes Received:
      0
      1. yes
      2. yes
      3. maybe (where are you filling your balloon - at the top or at the bottom?)

      Perhaps the biggest thing you're missing is that you are looking at a moment in time when 9 of your 10 balloons are already full, and ignoring how they got that way.
      Yes, at such a moment in time, you have more energy in your system than you are actively putting in.
      But you already spent that energy filling your balloons and/or getting them down to the bottom of your device.

      If you count the original energy spent 'priming' your device, you will always be in the negative.
       
    2.  
    3. Justcurioustwo

      Justcurioustwo Active Member

      Joined:
      Nov 2019
      Posts:
      40
      Likes Received:
      0
      I believe; in an electrical concept it is the difference between volts and watts.
      :)-
       
    4. Justcurioustwo

      Justcurioustwo Active Member

      Joined:
      Nov 2019
      Posts:
      40
      Likes Received:
      0
      You only have to "prime" the system once; :)-
       
    5. Justcurioustwo

      Justcurioustwo Active Member

      Joined:
      Nov 2019
      Posts:
      40
      Likes Received:
      0
      I wish you and yours the best for all times to come
       
    6. s.weinberg

      s.weinberg Well-Known Member EngineeringClicks Expert

      Joined:
      Nov 2012
      Posts:
      253
      Likes Received:
      0
      And that energy accounts for the entirety of the energy in the system. Which negates the thrust of your questions.
      In a perfect system, you can extract exactly what you put in, plus the amount in the system (which you paid for during priming). You will never take out more than you have put in.
      And your system won't be perfect, so you'll be losing out.
       
    7. Justcurioustwo

      Justcurioustwo Active Member

      Joined:
      Nov 2019
      Posts:
      40
      Likes Received:
      0
      Question- at any one moment in time, is the output energy larger than the energy needed to sustain the system?

      The benefit of this machine is it’s multiplying effect.

      1 an enclosed container (X) of air submerged in water has a lifting force (Y) equal to the volume of the water displaced minus the weight of the container; [yes] [no]

      [2] connection multiple containers one on top of the other creates a combined lifting force of (Y)+ (Y)+ (Y)+ (Y)+ (Y)+ (Y)+ (Y)+ (Y)+ (Y)+ (Y)

      Which is a greater lifting force than (Y); [yes] [no]
       
    8. s.weinberg

      s.weinberg Well-Known Member EngineeringClicks Expert

      Joined:
      Nov 2012
      Posts:
      253
      Likes Received:
      0
      There is no multiplying effect. There is the effect that if you put energy in something, it doesn't disappear a moment later.
      It's like saying: "I gave a ball a kick. A second later, it has enough energy to move without me putting any energy in. It's a multiplier!"

      You are willfully ignoring the energy you have embedded in your system during setup, which accounts for the entirety of the imbalance a bit later.

      Assuming your system was perfect, which it wouldn't be, you could only extract even a tiny bit of energy more than you are actively inputting until those tiny bits add up to the energy you expended during set up, and not a drop more. At that point, your system would not have any more energy within it than it takes to keep it going.

      Get yourself a tub of water, some balloons, a couple of pulleys, a string and an air supply and try it out
       
    9. Justcurioustwo

      Justcurioustwo Active Member

      Joined:
      Nov 2019
      Posts:
      40
      Likes Received:
      0
      I am totally aware of the laws of conservation of energy. What this system does is convert one form of energy into another with some lose in the process.

      We have—
      Mechanical energy
      Wind energy
      Heat energy
      Wave energy
      Light energy
      Atomic energy
      A rising, expanding bubble of air underwater

      All the above forms of energy can be converted into electrical energy and it is this electrical energy that powers todays civilizations. I agree there is a lose of energy in the process but that lose is acceptable when the ultimate energy output is a positive one.

      At least that is how I see it
       
    10. s.weinberg

      s.weinberg Well-Known Member EngineeringClicks Expert

      Joined:
      Nov 2012
      Posts:
      253
      Likes Received:
      0
      Atomic energy? Lol.

      Your system doesn't make use of at least half of your list. Which is mostly irrelevant, as the part that is the core is that little elevator bit, which will lose power.

      However you generate power upstream, simply don't connect it to the balloon bit, and you'll be ahead.

      Happy New Year
       
    11. Justcurioustwo

      Justcurioustwo Active Member

      Joined:
      Nov 2019
      Posts:
      40
      Likes Received:
      0
      Use that list;-
      I believe our ultimate fuel source will be hydrogen.

      One way to get hydrogen gas is through the electrolyte process using mechanical energy to run the system. I believe fuel cells work along this concept.
       

    Share This Page

    By using this website you agree to our Cookies usage. We and our partners operate globally and use cookies, including for analytics, personalisation, ads and Newsletters