3rd working machine you gandmother could make _2nd Law crushed

[telecom]

Exerted force by the system is dependent directly on the compression of the air. There is an american patent for this US patent 3,934,964(1974). As well as a British patent British patent No. 1330(1857). The idea arose in 1685. In the 1700s Bernoulli spoke out against them, cannot find his conclusion. Mine is that without the further exertion of enough energy to substantially alter the volumetric contents of the interior of a container you will not receive the needed differential to produce movement. I want to believe that a weight on a short throw piston plus 9.8 m/s^2 is enough energy to change the internal contents volumetrically to the point at which it will dramatically exert a buoyant force but I can't do to how little of the internal space is actually being modified compared to the whole size of the container.

So far the only two systems that I have seen recently are from Rosch Technology and James Kwok's. Rosch claims that their system makes 12KW and eats 4.4Kw in compressor energy, not a damn patent around tho. Kwok says his makes 30% more energy than it consumes. He did not renew his initial international patent and his world patent application hasn't been granted in 8 years now.

Hi David,
there is absolutely no compression of air in this patent - it works strictly on the dispacement. The Rosch is not going to work -air compressor is very inefficient.
Regards.

[dvy1214]

Dude, the piston is sealed with an O ring. The weight connected to the arm that pushes the piston down when the tank is properly oriented is most definitely compressing the air. That is what changes the volume of the air. If i am scuba diving, and i have my weight belt on, and I deflate my lungs i can sink because the compressed air in the tank on my back has a low volumetric profile. When I inflate my lungs I rise, because i have taken some of that air and decreased its compression by taking it from the tank with a valve and allowing it to expand into my lungs.

- David

[telecom]

Dude, the piston is sealed with an O ring. The weight connected to the arm that pushes the piston down when the tank is properly oriented is most definitely compressing the air. That is what changes the volume of the air. If i am scuba diving, and i have my weight belt on, and I deflate my lungs i can sink because the compressed air in the tank on my back has a low volumetric profile. When I inflate my lungs I rise, because i have taken some of that air and decreased its compression by taking it from the tank with a valve and allowing it to expand into my lungs.

- David

Most likely the chamber of the piston moving inward is connected to the chamber of the piston moving outward
in another branch, so there is no air compression involved - it simply moves back and forth not creating resistance.
As I said, this device works strictly on displacement.
Regards.

[TinselKoala]

And as I said, the device in the French patent is just a variant of one that is fully analyzed on Simanek's page. How the patent ever was granted is just an illustration of the flaws in the French patent system, which are not unique to France.

Look at the diagram below.

The piston weights are pushing air from one side to the other, working by weight, moving displacement from one side to the other just as you said. Put the weights on lever arms... no difference, just more sources of drag.

https://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/themes/buoyant.htm

And of course it will not work.

[TinselKoala]

@David: You should check out Wayne Travis's devices and claims. They put Kwok's claims and device to shame, and Travis actually has received a US patent recently.

http://mrwaynesbrain.com/

Try not to laugh too hard.... If you look on YT you can find a couple of video "demonstrations" of a couple of Travis's devices.