exchemist
Veteran Member
I have told you till I am blue in the face, you highly peculiar person. What's wrong with you?to find the reason this contraption won't work.
I haven't found it yet.
Have you-?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
I have told you till I am blue in the face, you highly peculiar person. What's wrong with you?to find the reason this contraption won't work.
I haven't found it yet.
Have you-?
-
Have you accounted for water pressure increasing with depth?
I wouldn't laugh too quickly people. I remember when people use to laugh at this perpetual motion waterfall
But take a look at THIS!!!
So there!
.
That's because I'm a bottom line person.Eh? no.
The point of applying physical science to problems such as this is to save yourself the trouble of building the bloody thing. But of course if a person can't understand physical science, then you may be right, in that the only way they can convince themselves is to actually make it. But James is obviously not going to do that. He is going to hawk his useless idea round the internet.
Although there are limits, such as when the water runs out or the air becomes too saturated to allow for evaporation.
A small model won't work for the same reason that the full scale model won't. The lift won't generate enough power to compress the air required to run it.You can’t make a scaled model, it wouldn’t work.
Perhaps you are getting there, by degrees.HOW IT WORKS
I would build the thing to prove it works but to do that it would have to be built full scale, in the ocean as advertised. You can’t make a scaled model, it wouldn’t work.
A three-dimensional computer model would work if it was programed to operate with the same parameters as the real thing including depth and sea pressure; ATM’s and it would have to operate in real time..
For every ATM in depth (33') an air bubble is compressed to half its size.
This also works in the reverse. An air bubble with a radius of 10 FT at 15 ATM's will expand to twice its size (r=20) at 14 ATM's.
-
A thought I had, how about instead of getting compressed air down, why not just have a heater at the bottom boiling the water locally to release gases? Then the efficiency of the system depends more on the generator and heating elements and such.Principles to run the machine
There are a few basic principles that you cannot deny.
[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]
[3] the energy needed to fill one container is equal to the energy needed to sustain the combined lifting force of the 10 (ten) containers referenced above;
[yes] [no]
-
I believe you are missing the core point here.The lift won't generate enough power to compress the air required to run it.
Tom
I designed a contraption like your idea that was along the mid-Atlantic ridge where molten lava was superheating seawater that did not flash into steam because of the extreme pressure at that depth.A thought I had, how about instead of getting compressed air down, why not just have a heater at the bottom boiling the water locally to release gases? Then the efficiency of the system depends more on the generator and heating elements and such.
Please think. You have to expend your "energy to compress" to fill each balloon, not only once.I believe you are missing the core point here.
In the following energy = (E)
In the following force = (F) energy to compress
Balloon one has a (F1) that equals energy = (E1)
Balloon two has a (F2) that equals energy = (E2)
Balloon three has a (F3) that equals energy = (E3)
Balloon four has a (F4) that equals energy = (E4)
When you have them all attached to each other
they have a combined lifting force of (F1)+(F2)+(F3)+(f4)
While at the same time it only takes the force of (F1) to keep the system running.
You now have (E1)+(E2)+(E3)+(e4) combined working together
Or so I believe
Square food? Surely you mean square meal?Air Bubble
Air is a gas
gases compress with pressure
Assuming constant temperature, Boyle's - a pressure of 19 atmospheres (1 atmosphere at sea level + 18 atmospheres for being 600ft under water)
One square food of water at 1 ATM weighs 64 lbs.
One square foot of water will compress to 1/2 square foot at 2 ATM
EXAMPLE—
Surface volume (X) = 300 CF
Upper force (Y) = 64 lbs.
Volume at 2 atm (X)/2 = 150 CF = 150 X 64 = 9,600 pounds of upward force
Volume at 3 atm (X)/3 = 100 CF = 100 X 64 = 6,400 pounds of upward force
Volume at 6 atm (X)/6 = 50 CF = 50 X 64 = + Y X CF = 3,200 lbs.
Volume at 9 atm (X)/9 = 33.33 CF; upward force = Y X CF = 2,133 lbs.
Volume at 12 atm (X)/12 = 25 CF; upward force = Y X CF = 1,600 lbs.
Volume at 15 atm (X)/15 = 20 CF; upward force = Y X CF = 1,280 lbs.
Volume at 18 atm (X)/18 = 16.66 CF; upward force = Y X CF = 1,066 lbs.
Total upward force = 25,259 lbs.
An air bubble rises at 2 feet a second
2 X 60 = 120 feet per minute
120 X 60 = 7,200 feet per hour
5,280 feet in a mile
7,200/5,280 = 1.36 miles an hour
TOTAL force 25,259 lbs. traveling at 1.36 miles an hour
globule
I'm going to plug these numbers into the contraption and see what happens next
-
You forgot, it takes at least as much energy to pump the air down as you could get out. And that is assuming a perfect frictionless system. Your device whole consume energy, not[1] The lifting force of an air bubble (balloon) is equal to the water being displaced.; call this energy [X] This you cannot deny.
[2] In water, an air bubble expands as it rises. This you cannot deny.
[3] The lifting force of multiple balloons in a vertical row, all attached to each other has a lifting force equal to the combined lifting force of all the balloons; call this energy (F)
[4] Energy [X]+[X]+[X]+[X]+[X] = [F]
[5] [F] five (5) times greater than [X] at any one moment in time. This you cannot deny
[6] To maintain this process all you have to add, at any one moment in time is [X] energy to get an output of [Y]
This you cannot deny
View attachment 33399
Whatever the energy is needed to pump the air down is (X) while I am getting out the expanding, lifting force of (X}+(X)+(X)+(X) out-? **at any moment in time**You forgot, it takes at least as much energy to pump the air down as you could get out.
You are deliberately missing the point. Your gadget can never work as a source of energy, in any form, as to do so it would need to break the laws of thermodynamics. The whole notion is silly and pointless.A lot of people here and elsewhere have been telling me that this gadget is unworkable; they have been correct. My calculations were gust wrong. I have gone back and crunched the numbers once again.
Attached is my latest version.
This version only goes to a depth of 198 feet and it generates a pulling force of 1,016,183 pounds of upward pull, puling at an accelerating speed of over 4 feet per second.