Not signed in (Sign In)

Vanilla 1.1.7 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.


Welcome Guest! Want to take part in these discussions? If you have an account, sign in now.
If you don't have an account, apply for one now.
    •  
      CommentAuthorRickG
    • CommentTimeAug 12th 2016 edited
     
    Our first prototype was a simple soup can heater and it worked very well! We were amazed at the amount of heat it produced. We then built a larger bean can heater and it did much better than the small soup can heater. The bean can heater produced 158 degrees F. in just two minutes!  
     
    check it out here:  
    http://www.fuellessusa.com/FUELLESSHEATER.html
    •  
      CommentAuthorenginerd
    • CommentTimeMar 31st 2018
     
    There have been many many devices built that attempt to use buoyancy to drive a motor. Lots of examples are shown at this website:  
     
    https://www.lockhaven.edu/~dsimanek/museum/themes/buoyant.htm  
     
    You can certainly get energy from an object rising through buoyancy from a starting position with potential energy. When the object rises to the top, there is no way to get it back down without expending more energy than you harvested as it floated up.  
     
    It is just like a rock, or water, falling down from a height (like a waterfall). You can drive a generator with the falling water (like a hydroelectric dam does), but it would take more energy than you got out of it to carry the water back to the top, so you can't cycle and you can't generate energy (unless you have the sun involved, heating the water back into the sky to rain down on the high point).  
     
    You can't make a buoyancy engine unless you can sink the float with less energy than you get floating the float. Nobody has done it yet (and many have tried). There is lots of evidence that suggests it is impossible.
  1.  
    Enginerd: you probably are correct about buoyancy: but air is a different matter. Reversing freefall for 20.38 meter will cost you only 20 newton seconds of applied force for one kilogram. But on the way back down that one kilogram can produce 3961 newton seconds of force.  
     
    The ballistic pendulum conserves Newtonian momentum but it does not conserve energy; energy is allegedly lost as heat. That means that the energy of the large mass is not expected to be able to return the motion to the small mass; because the energy has been lost as heat.  
     
    The Newtonian momentum of the large mass and the small mass are the same in the ballistic pendulum. So a transfer of momentum back and forth from large mass to small mass should no be impossible.  
     
    And this full transfer of motion from large to small and then small mass to large mass is what is shown by the double de-spin cylinder and spheres. NASA's assumption that the Dawn Mission de-spin device conserved energy is false: it conserved Newtonian Momentum, because the motion can be returned.