A machine to convert gravity to mechanical energy # 2

[TinselKoala]

@Jandell: Then you can go beat your head against a brick wall. It will have just about the same effect.

Brian, you have yet to explain how, at the bottom of the continuous descending column of tanks, you can bring one tank to an abrupt halt, in order for its weight to keep moving, while not also bringing all the other tanks, which are following it without gaps, also to an abrupt halt.  You have also not explained how, if the water pressure at, say, 30 feet is small enough to be able to be overcome by the momentum of the falling weight, yet the pressure at or near the surface is great enough to push the expander back in. There is no mechanical advantage from your pulley system. The chain of tanks must be moving as fast at the top as it is at the bottom, have you considered that? How do you deal with the momentum of your weight, at the TOP? It's going in the wrong direction.
You see, until you clear up your misconceptions about how things actually work, trying to make an exact mathematical analysis is like, well, beating your head against a brick wall.

But don't let me stop you, I'm the Evil Skeptic after all, and I get my jollies from seeing people waste their time. Just go build the thing. Oh, wait, you have no building skills or materials. Well, then use a spreadsheet to analyze the system properly. No, wait, you have limited math skills.  Well, then, you could seek advice from those who have those skills--but clearly you don't have to take it.

[brian334]

Jandell,
Thanks for the advice, I have limited math skills. I would appreciate your help.
Please explain to me mathematically why this machine won’t work.
Thanks,
Brian

[mondrasek]

Brian,

I thought of a simple experiment that you may be able to try to show the effects of the drag of water on your system.  It approximates your concept of the tanks falling in a continuous column.  Find yourself a small wheel with a solid rim, ie. no spokes.  You want the wheel and rim to be smooth so that any cross section taken through the center is equal to any other.  These are common on children's push and ride toys as well as some strollers and wagons.  When you spin this type of wheel it approximates your continuous column, since there are no gaps between sections in the wheel and the only place water resistance can exist is on the sides.  So spin this wheel in air and note how much it runs.  The only resistance is the friction from the bearings and air resistance.  Then dunk the wheel underwater and spin it again.  You will see that it does not spin much at all.  This will show how much drag water has on an object moving through it, even if falling or rising in a continuous column.  It may lead you to understand that your falling and rising tanks could only move very slowly, thus eliminating the momentum you envision being built up to do the work of expanding your tanks.

Also, a complete mathematical analysis of your system would be not only very laborious, but still not conclusive.  With fluids you have to deal with turbulence, something very hard to model.  This is one of the reasons that weather modeling is so difficult and imprecise.  Back in the day the first super computers were used to solve the complex equations governing turbulence in a fluid and it's effects on drag.  Now a modern computer could likely model simple systems in near real time, but only to a gross approximation.  This is the reason that real wind tunnel testing exists:  the math and complexity of trying to model every molecule of a fluid and all the forces governing it's interactions are beyond what we can do even with the fastest computers.  But approximations do exist and lead those of us who have studied or worked in the field to know certain phenomenon will certainly exist, like drag.  I personally cannot calculate exactly how much drag there will be, but can tell you with certainty that it will be significant.  The above recommended experiment will show that.

Thanks,

M.

[brian334]

M.
If it took 2 weeks for the tanks to fall this machine would still work.
But the faster the tanks fall the better it will work.

Jandell made a statement that using high school math and science it would be easy to prove  this machine won’t work, so what’s the proof ?

[utilitarian]

M.
If it took 2 weeks for the tanks to fall this machine would still work.
But the faster the tanks fall the better it will work.

Jandell made a statement that using high school math and science it would be easy to prove  this machine won’t work, so what’s the proof ?

Figure it out for yourself.  Your lack of understanding of basic physics and math does not have to be a permanent condition.