ok straight into it. a tall tube filled with water, standing vertical. anode and cathode at the bottom cracking water into gas. the gas rises and drives water turbines, 1 after the other, when gas reaches the top of tube, the gas is burnt to create water and heat. the heat is used to drive a sterling engine, to drive a small generator. the water turbines are also driving generators. how many turbines are needed to crack the water? how tall is the tube? imagine a tube 10 stories high. thats a lot of turbines being turned, and friction isnt going to stop the bubbles rising, and 10 stories of power cable isnt going to cause much resistance. the sterling engine is there only to collect the waste heat from burning gases back to water. think about it neopole Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Work it through. You'll (eventually) find that you put more energy into the electrolysis than you get back from either the mechanical work done or the heat from burning the gas.
also the efficiency of sterling engine, turbine and generators should be 100%. moreover if its a closed system, in the sense no atmospheric interference, then over the time the h2o content reduces and the hydrogen ions and hydroxyl ions cluster around anode and cathode respectively. 6 H2O ==> 2 H2 + O2 +4 H(+) +4 OH(-) (1/3rd water only comes back for every unit of water cracked ) the system would halt after sometime.
To my understanding, the most efficient engine is described by the Carnot Cycle. The Carnot Principle : No engine working continuously between given fixed and uniform temperatures of source and sink can have a greater efficiency than a perfectly reversible engine which operates between the same reservoirs. The efficiency of the Carnot Cycle : efficiency = (T1-T2) / T1 For a given T1 the efficiency is theoretically greatest when T2 = -273 C or 0 degrees Kelvin. Therefore efficiency = (T1-0) / T1 = 1 or 100% efficiency. On a very cold day in the arctic you might get -70C ? for free, any further and you are using energy. Absolute zero, 0 Kelvin requires a very large expenditure of energy to reach… Nice try though. If you want to see someone really getting lost, check out my post 'Are solar sails a Yellow Submarine' Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! The best perpetual motion machine I am aware of works with toast. As we all know, toast will always land buttered side down. If you butter both sides with EXACTLY the same amount of butter it should just float above the floor, rotating slowly. Be careful not to slip on the toast. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! lol. Apparently it also works with cats.. do not try this.
What limits the energy extracted from the rising bubbles pushing turbines? What stops this energy being greater than the energy required to electrolyse the water to start with? I'm thinking about sizes of bubble, their turbine turning power, the pressure at the bottom of the tube, and the energy needed to make the bubbles, but I can't make the pieces fit.
Hi ryans, I left it leading 'very large expenditure of energy to reach…' as a half-joke, of course the energy requirement would be infinite. Bit of a Zeno's arrow that one...ish.. I would not suggest attempting the test. We used to have TWO cats.. the Lord had an unfortunate accident. Being a smart cat, when he saw were we were going with with the toast, he panicked, jumped off the kitchen table and landed on some buttered toast. He rode that toast like a pro, but missed the cat flap by about 2 inches... It was a catastrophy Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Must go to bed.. tired & talking crap... :bugeye:
As the Tortoise said to Achilles... Pete, James R's advice is excellent as usual. This best thing I can suggest is read : Godel, Escher, Bach: an eternal golden braid, by Douglas R. Hofstadter. It is excellent training for this type of problem. ANY type of problem. It may greatly reduce the number of sad, tortoise lollypops in the world. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! .. its a long story.. Beware of high-energy metaphysical experiments!
Perpetual Quantum Motion I have rewritten the site at www.thewebspert.com/cresswell/ and recent activity indicates that the terrible news is now much more palatable. We shall see.
I had a look at your site. As the print on my keycaps would eventually wear out with a full reply, I shall limit myself to 'A Most Fundamental Error'. The example you give of a transformer is too simplified. What kind of argument are you putting up if the transformer has no load? How can you have eddy current losses if VI is ZERO? Also do not forget the copper losses & the hysteresis losses when you are doing your calculations. I assume you may have a reply ready, stating that I failed to observe a point made somewhere else in your document. I would suggest you reformat your document again, each section being self-contained in hypothesis and conclusion. In addition, put in links to the COMPLETE mathematical workings of each point as separate documents. The reason for doing this is, your primary web-page, would increase in length tenfold. If your theories have foundation the physical universe, you should have by now built something tangible, which works on these principles; 'inadvertently thrown away' models provide no proof at all sadly. I would ask you, without malice, to be aware that young people may find your web-site misleading and a poor foundation for learning. I fully agree that it is always important to doubt accepted reality occasionally, however if you state publicly something is true and you have no absolute proof (for whatever reason), please make this clear. People are happy to entertain and possibly develop most ideas, but will balk, when confronted with poorly founded alternative 'facts'. Not following these standard 'guidelines' may result in a rubbish-in-rubbish-out discussion, and waste your and other's resources. You can see much evidence of this in the 'pseudoscience' section. Sincerely, from someone who is not an electrical engineer, or a physicist. 'All knowledge is learning and therefore good, unless its bad' (Unknown)
The perpetual motion of energy My message is clearly not for you. You failed totally at the first diagram. Why are you concerned about 'young' people ? I aim for how to think and you push what to think. You are the biggest problem of all. You are a very sad person and disappoint me greatly.
Mr Cresswell, I hesitate to answer, as this forum is as requested in 'Sticky: Science and Pseudoscience - A Primer' a forum for standardised scientific discussion. I am also against throwing petrol on small fires. I am concerned for the 'young people' because most visitors to this site, I imagine are students or school kids. I am certain many are superior to me in IQ, however there is little substitute for practical experience. I attempted to honestly comment, to the best of my ability and without malice. I believe I understood you message well on the first reading. In fairness, I like many know of the 'jobs for the boys' culture. Argument from authority is a problem the world can possibly do without and yes, it feeds on complacency. I failed to see a difference between your message and the methods you disagree with. When I believe I see something accidentally or intentionally misrepresented to prove a point, I am prone not to let it lie. If done with as little intentional arrogance as possible, there may be hope. Otherwise we shall increasingly swamp in 'low-value information overload'. Forums like this are remarkable, and unprecedented in functionality and accessibility. I am concerned they will not reach their great potential, if not constructively used and appropriately supported. The future has not happened yet, we may all get a nice surprise. If I have further misinterpreted you, I offer my apology. "Education, is the ability to listen to almost anything without losing your temper or your self-confidence" Robert Frost.
Perpetual Quantum Motion I have your message and very much appreciate your comments. I have broken my balls on this thing for more than 22 years. It just got deeper and deeper and the whole story is almost too big to be told. I went public on the web because an attempt to patent these systems is an obscene selfishness. I am not of that ilk. Alan C
I have one question that I'm sure other people will ask. Have you built anything? I see all diagrams and writing, and the truth is, I have neither the background in education nor the experience to say whether you are right or wrong. My only question is, have you built anything that works yet? -AntonK
Oh my, these kind of messages would almost make me look at the site just to see what great discoveries for mankind can be found there... Bye! Crisp
Perpetual Quantum Motion Yes. I have checked out three but the novelty wears off quickly because none were big enough to be spectacular and useful. Perpetual motion alone is boring and annoying. Number 4 will be good. It is a much simpler version of the gyro engine. I am going to patent this one but when the time comes I shall probably not do so. I built it 5 years ago but did not fully understand what I had got. The speed and power scared me a bit and there was a throbbing hum as it tried to 'lock on'. I have to work out of my living room and what scared me most was that I had no means of stopping it. Control is the biggest problem. Imagine having to dab the brake pedal of a car to increase power.
which is another reason GM and other companies are dreaming when they say h20 powered cars are the future.
