free electricity possible?

Aman Shaw has the false idea that more energy is taken from a gravity field by a descending weight if the descending weight has some resistance made, for example, by turning a motor to do work; but that it can be raised back up again, restoring the gravitational energy, with less work if there is no resistance to the upward motion.

He has been spamming many threads with his "gravity engine" nonsense, total unconcerned that he is suggesting an "over unity" device (get net energy from a closed system).

As he does not accept that energy is conserved, (cannot be increased by impossible over unity devices), here is how it has been shown to be false in another thread:

If the mass descending in a gravity field has no resistance, for example is falling in a vacuum, then the decrease in its gravitation potential energy, for example 100 joules, is 100% converted into kinetic energy. If it has great resistance, so it takes hours to slide down, straight or curved sheet of sand paper, (or what ever is making great resistance to the fall) then 99.99+% of that same 100J of gravitational energy is converted into heating the sand paper and the mass (or is doing work, but less than 100J, on the resistance device). (There is tiny amount of KE even if the sliding speed is only 1mm/minute so 100% of the decrease in gravitational 100J is converted into some other form of energy.)

If the mass is then lifted (with no friction in the, lifting device) back to the starting position where it has the original 100J more of gravitational energy again, then the energy required for lifting it is 100J, but of course there is always some friction (energy loss) in the lifting device (even if it is your right arm) so more than 100J is required to lift the mass back to its starting position.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Oh, I tend to doubt that. Given that we've just discovered a new elementary particle and all.

True dat . . . this thread is a good example.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Just want to point out that the OP was probably a spammer that could not post his spam links.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

neverthless inspired a somewhat thoughtful debate ... sometimes deeds in the name of Evil, bear fruits to savor for the GOOD

 

I think I may have finally caught on to how his silly notion works in his under-educated mind. He seems to think that by "dragging out" (pardon the poor pun

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

) the downward part of the motion that more energy is 'produced' than is required to lift it STRAIGHT back up again.

And actually, I believe that type of warped thinking is fairly common in people who know practically nothing at all about physics. :shrug:

 

We must be reading different threads.

And sometimes the honey badger eats a cobra.

 

Cheaper

rather than chasing after free electricity they should work at reducing the big line losses of transmission

 

no free lunches

amman. your blog. nice idea the wheel thing for free energy. but physics has thrashed this one out. some object following the curve of the wheel does not add graviational potential energy because of its longer path i.e potential energy is independant of length of path or velocity on the path. the gravity vector is downwards so what u have is similar to a pendulam effect, which eventually comes to a standstill due to friction, wind resistance and the earths motion. consider that an object in orbit around the earth is independant of the mass of the object. i.e. all objects orbiting at the same velocity will be the same distance above the earth, regardless of their masses. they are still falling towards the earth but have enough forward velocity to stay in orbit. this is not free energy. they stay in orbit until friction or solar wind etc slows them down and they get closer to earth. friction

 

Hello, Simple answer is yes.

New energy thermal turbine is operative at minus 10* Celsius.

Water replaced by Carbon Dioxide CO2 Refrigerant R744.

720 watts increasing by RPM or heat. One litre turbine 60 RPM.

Other usage is piston engine slide rail injection all cylinder bar one fuelled to provide hot water jacket-reversed cooling.

Both turbine and piston empty to what mostly was fuel tank but now includes fridge expansion chamber cooling of CO2.

Only thing against it is oil and coal. Dont need Steam. Diesel burns at 1200* Celsius, replacement energy needs 20 degrees of that.

Do you have warm small space in the house? It costs nothing except purchase of unit for 24 hour power. Remember the red flags that came out as Steam came in.

Peter

 

To DaS Energy: Welcome to sciforums.

Your post is impossible to follow. Please give link(s) to what you are taking about.

 

Billy T...it's called SPAM.

 

Perhaps, but no product or web cite is mentioned, so I´m more inclined to think it is some kid.

 

I agree with youreyes. It looks like spam. Warning: Spam evidence thread below

http://www.thebackshed.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4523&PN=2

 

I went to that link. Still no products to sell, no web cites but there is a blog which I did not read. No request for funds to support research as the "green gas Ammonina" guy sometimes makes. etc. So still does not seem to be typical product or services related spam.

If posting nonsense (which it probably is) were basis for a "Spam Ban," we would lose 1/3 of the posters here. Let give him some more rope and see what he does with it.

I don´think he is a kid anymore, but still he is not able to communicate his idea well enough to follow. It all seems like some pesudo-science ego nut´s work - he mentions he invented it all a couple of times, etc.

 

Aman Shah,

I don't know anything about physics but I do know a bit about human nature. We believe what we see. If you believe this mechanism will create more energy then build it. make it work and allow it to be tested. If it fails, accept that it failed and your hypothesis is wrong. If it succeeds then those who called you stupid can eat crow. But continually talking about it and not showing any proof will only continue to get you mocked.

 

We'd be far better off without that 1/3, Billy. People like Tom Booth, Masterov, and that idiot who claims aliens gave him the plans to build his energy-producing " gravity-powered" device contribute absolutely nothing of value.

Once they've posted 4 or 5 times - with an equal number of people trying to show them their errors - it becomes clear that they don't have anything useful.

But what's worse is that they never cease posting their nonsense! They have NO interest in learning, they just want to ramble on with their delusional version of science in general and physics in specific.

And although a few have some entertainment value - I've actually laughed at their sheer stupidity - they are VERY few and short-lived at that.

So why do we even bother with them? Once they've displayed their true colors beyond any doubt, why not give the boot? Get it over with and spare the membership the agony of their presence.

 

Ahh, the definition of spam I am working off of probably isn't as strict as yours. Some people go around the internet peddling their pet ideas / designs for emotional support and validation. While the currency they are trying to get is different (i.e. emotional vs. money), their tactics are the same. Get your crap out to as many places at once and hope someone gets suckered into it.

 

Hello Billy,

New at this, it dont let me know when people reply, dont let me paste images, dont how to link.

Image would be here.

Carbon Dioxide the weirdest gas ever. Begins as a block of Dry-Ice. Heat increase changes to gas, then to liquid, then to gas, then to Dry-Ice. It’s the only gas that behaves like liquid.
CO2 gas at temperature above 31.2* will not convert to liquid no matter what compression is applied.
The energies of CO2 are thousands time greater than Steam.
Energy as a force is measure in bar, one bar being the equivalent of 14.2 PSI or one atmosphere.
One litre of Water, Steam or Gas per second at 9 bar pressure passing through a turbine generator produces 720 watts. Any increase in bar pressure or volume per second increases the wattage output.
Working from a base line of 0* Celsius Steam is beginning to format 100*C whilst CO2 has already reached 7,000 bar.
The attached diagram operates in two different mode, the first below 31.2*C using the cooling loop of a fridge to cool the hot gas before going to the compressor which squeezes the gas into liquid before feeding it back in heating point.
The other uses a boiler and exploits the fact CO2 at temperature above 31.2*C formats into Dry-Ice. At 100*C it’s 50/50. 50% Dry-Ice coats boiler ceiling and wall and the other 50% remains high pressure hot gas.
This design does away with the fridge cooling loop and instead exploits the Dry-Ice field constant in the boiler. CO2 though gas but behaving like liquid is force drained from the bottom of the Boiler then piped back through the Dry-Ice field which cools the CO2 gas back to liquid. Hot gas exiting the Boiler forces the cold liquid at the same pressure of the gas exiting the boiler. The cold liquid at force then drives a Hydro turbine which empties into a screw pump Boiler feed. The technology is fully sealed and 100% recycling.

-------------------------------------------------
The forces of recycling CO2 are easily adapted to piston engines. A piston engine equipped with slide rail injection leaves on cylinder being fuel fed so to create combustion force energy then unused heat from combustion is transferred to the water cooling jacket that surrounds all cylinders. All but the combustion cylinder is adjusted so only the exhaust valve opens and it do so on two stroke cycles. The injector in place of squirting in fuel squirts CO2 into the hot cylinder.

Petrol flame temperature is above 600*C. The pressure force of combustion is at best five times that of compression. 200 PSI combusts to 1,000 PSI equal to 70 bar pressure. CO2 at 100*C has 7,000 bar pressure. Or 50 extra piston strokes of the same power, given only half the heat transfers.

Peter

 

Hello again Billy,

Just got how to do a link,

Peter

http://i1225.photobucket.com/albums/ee397/DaSEnergy/DAS.jpg

 

First sentence is not correct. Second sentence is OK up to the "then..." but then false for rest. The third may or may not be true but most substances do have a "critical point." Here is phase diagram for CO2, which like most things becomes a solid at high enough pressure even when very hot by human standards. For example the iron core at center of the Earth is solid despite being at temperatures of liquid iron in a blast furnace.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Why do you say CO2 is very weird - its phase diagram is quite typical. Water´s is more unusual in that the solid liquid boundary line slope to the left as pressure rises - that is why you can ice skate on -0.5C ice. I.e. the high pressure under the skate blade makes the -0.5 ice turn into a liquid while under the skate blade - you really only skate on water.