Hi all!
God this is difficult but here is an other try, this time based on pressure.
There is one big questions that I couldn't figure out by myself or neither I didn't find any answers from web.
So I'd like to know if anyone of you can answer me.
The big question
How does the hydrostatic pressure behave in the situation I have draw ? I don't think it will disappear and
I don't think that in pool there are different pressures depending if you are under the pressure tank
or beside the pressure tank under water.
If I'm right and there is a hydrostatic pressure difference under the pressure tank depending if you are
under the water level of the pool (lower pressure) or above the water level of the pool in the pressure tank (higher pressure)
then I see the systems behaviour at different phases like this. Now I'd like to know where I have made
mistakes in my thinking - or have I ;)
Air tank pressure ?
Air tank have equal pressure on top and bottom if the hydrostatic pressure of air is not counted.
This pressure is equal to hydrostatic pressure of water at the bottom of air tank.
What happens when the air pressure tank fills the piston with air?
When air moves from air tank to piston (because of pressure) this will lower the pressure in air tank.
This means that the water level at the bottom of air tank will rise. But at same time the volume of piston size
will increase. So what I think is that the pools water level don't change. Does this mean that we get buoyancy
for free by using pressure difference ?
What happens when the piston filled with air moves from pool to pressure tank?
From pools water level point of view this means that the water level will get lower. But at the same time
the same amount of water will come from pressure tank. So the water level in pool don't change.
What happens when the pressure tank pushes the air back to air tank ?
This will lower the water level at the top of pressure tank. But at the same time the outer air pressure
will "push" the same amount of water to pressure tank. This will not lower the pools water level because
at the same time the air tanks pressure will increase which will push the water at the bottom of air tank
lower.
So for me it looks like we can get buoyancy for free. Or actually it is not free. The required energy to do
all these thing is at the end retrieved from outer air pressure.
So now we have buoyancy and this buoyancy should move the machine. This means that buoyancy should be greater
than forces against buoyancy: friction (piston, rollers, water resistance) and opening and closing the air tank connections.
Because I don't have any clue how much the this may cost or how much it is possible to reduce these, I don't start guessing.
Basically I think the bigger piston the more buoyancy.
An other big question is how fast the pistons will be filled with water or air. I guess this depends on
pistons size, friction and size of air tank connections tubes. And this requires much more knowledge of hydraulics
that I currently have :)
On thing is that the pressure in air tank will slowly decrease. How fast this happens is a mystery to me.
BR,
Gravitator
Have you read about the hydrostatic paradox?
Apart from the other problems in your drawing, everything will just reach equilibrium and stay that way.
Is gravity a conservative force? Can it be more?
G'day Gravitator,
How will you keep the water from boiling? If you maintain a vacuum above the water the water will boil at ambient temperatures and your vacuum pumps will have to work overtime.
Just another little snag along the way. Read up on vapour pressure.
Hans von Lieven
hans
his 1st drawing looks more like a chicken water dispenser (with stuff inside). no vaccum pump is needed to keep the water in the upper part. as long as the water is above the lip of the up-side-down cylinder (jar), no water will come out.
i'm not sure, but i would say the water is hanging from the top (with help from atmosphere pushing on surrounding outside water) as much as supported from the bottom. if so, then the upper water won't exert as much weight as if it were open to atmosphere.
i may not have said that exactly right, but i think you can.
tom
@ tbird,
The weight of the water in the top tank would all be on whatever supports that tank at the bottom.
@ all
Would the pressure in the top tank be negative? Is the water pressing down or pulling on the water above it?
There is pressure available at the bottom of a water column, but if you use any of it, then the water that moves must be re-lifted in order to reset the potential energy available.
Quote from: hansvonlieven on January 24, 2009, 04:51:28 PM
G'day Gravitator,
How will you keep the water from boiling? If you maintain a vacuum above the water the water will boil at ambient temperatures and your vacuum pumps will have to work overtime.
Hans von Lieven
I believe he is not refering to a true 'vacuum'. but rather a negative pressure area, created by filling the tank, then allowing it to compress the ar. the "bubble" will be lower pressure than the bottom of the tank, because of the weight of the water inside. possibly some air in that bubble, but a very small ammount. not enough pressure difference to alter the boiling point much. Its the same thing that hapens at the top inside of a Water Tower when they fill it up and people start running their showers and whatnot.
i might be misunderstanding this device the way its drawn here, but....
the problem in having with this is, that the pressure in the pool will in most cases equal that of the pressure tank. and in one specific case be greater than.
im not seeing how this interacts with the air inside, and if it did, the great pressure would simply compress said air, and the pistons would stop moving.
if the air were already compressed too much the pistons would push open until they stopped or balanced our the pressure, and again stop moving.
unfortunately, in a closed system, the efects of gravity do increase the pressure, but it is mostly constant throughout each separated section.
if the pool were "open", what would stop the pressure tank from overflowing the pool and leveling out all the water??
just my thoughts...,
Sm0ky
G'day Smoky,
In an inverted water tank such as the one shown, with a water column of 9.81 m and a space on top, if that space does nor contain air, the vacuum will be hard. Water will boil.
Hans von Lieven
Thank you all for your reply :) I found something about "vapour pressure" and "hydrostatic paradox".
And I think
@hans
You are right! The water will boil.
@All
The more I think about the "pressure difference" assumption the less I believe that there are such a difference.
So I guess the idea described in these two pictures is busted :D
@truh
This "gravity is a conservative force" is little bit mystery to me. At some level I understand this but...
It seems that it is used as a general argument when dropping ideas.
How can the "gravity is a conservative force" used in next situation ?
Because of this (see the picture) I think there might be a way to use gravity as energy source.
If we ignore at this point the technical issues and the question of how long will it take to
move water from bottom to top and keep the focus in energy point of view, I think that it is possible
to get energy from gravitation.
Here are the steps and who is paying as I see them.
1. The system is locked as long the water is moved from tank B to tank A. The actual work is
done by atmosphere air pressure. If the height is e.g. 7 meter, I think the water will not boil.
2. In step two the lock will be released. This means that the tank A will fall down. What I think is
that tank A will have so much kinetic energy that it is possible to lock the system in it's original
state. This time the empty tank on the top will be B and the tank filled with water would be A.
And this way I think potential energy can be created "from nothing" using atmosphere air pressure.
Here is one more pictures for "gravity is a conservative force" example I posted in my previous post.
This idea is my first post in here and I'm not trying to lift it up again. I took this pictures here because
it clarifies little bit better what I mean when I say "so much kinetic energy". And against these
values it has been calculated that this should be possible. The negative comments where
1. with 10 000 liters of water it has so much energy that it will take really a lot of time
to wait the system stops after release.
2. it is VERY difficult to build so big piston because of expansion (pressure, temperature etc.)
and positve comment was
1. It seems that with these example weights the system will stop in "correct position" for
next tank filling.
But like I told you - this is not a suggestion for machine again but rather little bit more information
for my previous post.
BR,
Gravitator
@ gravitator,
I am glad that you took the time to understand what was being shared with you.
I had a very similar idea to what you are now posting. The pressure required to move water to a height is much greater than atmospheric pressure
Water is more dense than air. That is why water stays at the lowest point it can. Lakes and rivers are great examples of this.
Is a hydroelectric dam solar powered? I say YES. That is how sea water gets back up to the top of the mountain.
.
In the hydrostatic paradox a liquid of any shape has the same pressure at a specific height anywhere in that liquid no matter what the shape of the vessel.
Have you ever seen a garden hose used as a water level?
A little experiment:
Take a water proof bag and put water in it. Place a hose into the bag, Seal the hose and the bag by twisting. Now press on the bag to release the air. Keep the open end of the hose above the bag. Now feel the pressure required to push just a little water out of the hose when raised by even a few inches, and then try it at a foot or two. I think you will understand the problem with your idea then.
Learning is always a good thing.
;)
truth,
you must have missed the 100kg weights on each cylinder. since the diameter of transfer tube is much reduced in size, the amount of weight to move is too. as long as the 100kg is more than half (the top will pull the other half, closed system) the weight of the column, the water will transfer. he may have to reduce the area the 100kg is spread over to insure enough weight per sq in, but it will move, won't it?
also, i have to wonder if the hydrostatic paradox applies to a body of water cut off from atmospheric pressure. how much pressure does water in a straw, with your thumb over the top, have at the bottom? if it doesn't come out, will it show a weight on the bottom of the water or is it all transferred to the weight of the straw?
...or maybe it is not busted. For some reason I just can't figure this out.
@truth
In learning I try my best :) I have tested this little experiment and I know that it is very
difficult to rise water. In my pictures the water is not lifted with lower tank's weight.
It is lifted with upper tank's weight which will create a negative pressure - like in old fashion
pump with limit of 9,81 meters height.
@all
In these four pictures I try to explain, what I don't understand and what I understand.
Picture 4
In hydrostatic paradox the water level is always same and from this point of view I understand
that the hydrostatic pressure will not change.
Picture 3
In jar there is mercury at the bottom. If I add some water on mercury this will increase
the total pressure in mercury. After added water the hydrostatic pressure at the bottom of
jar is height of mercury * 13,6 + the pressure of waters weight.
Picture 1
In this picture there is an illusive tube from sea to outer space. The water is pushed to tube
by weight of air - not by air pressure. The air pressure is hydrostatic pressure of air on the ground.
Beside illusive tube there is a short cut to do the same. Now the big question is from what level
should I start to count the depth when I want to know the hydrostatic pressure. From "general" water level
or from tube's water level. If from tube's water level this means that if the short cut is done
somewhere on earth this will increase the hydrostatic pressure all the round in world. And I don't think
this is the case.
One thing that has been in my head is the next simple experiment. Imagine a glass of water and hydrostatic
pressure at the bottom of glass. Put a paper on it. Now turn the glass upside down and imagine the hydrostatic
pressure at the bottom of glass (just upon the paper). The water will stay in the glass because of air pressure
and the hydrostatic pressure is still the same.
Now put the glass into water so that the paper is just little bit under water and remove the paper.
The water will still stay in the glass. But what happens here ?!?! Is the water level just a replacement to
paper and the hydrostatic pressure that was in the glass don't change ?
Picture 2
In this picture there is same situation than it is on earth. The only difference to Picture 1 is that
the water have been replaced with mercury and air with water.
Now how I see this is that the rising mercury is just a replacement to "missing" water. What I mean
with this is that the hydrostatic pressures at the bottom in Picture 1 and Picture 2 are equal.
The rising mercury will not change the level from where you should start counting the hydrostatic pressure.
It will just rise the total pressure all around mercury.
If this is not what happens then in Picture 1 the jar done in Spain should increase the hydrostatic pressure
in Japan at one meter depth.
And as a conclusion I think that in raised water/mercury you should count the hydrostatic pressure from top
level to "general" level which means that there is a pressure difference depending.
...or maybe not :)
Gravitator,
in pic 1, has the air in the tube to outerspace been pulled out? if not the water will not rise in that tube, i think.
tom
tbird,
Yes, it is pulled out.
this is daum.
Quote from: Gravitator on January 25, 2009, 01:14:10 PM
tbird,
Yes, it is pulled out.
then if you have a total vacuum to outerspace, the water will rise in the tube to about 32 feet (the amount that can be lifted without cavitation) where it will boil (as hans says).
i doubt if you could ever get a vacuum in the tube because of the water's constant boiling.
maybe you need a different example.
tom
I agree with hans that water will boil if it lifted in the way I draw it. If we decrease in my
pictures the height to e.g. to 8 meters and there is no empty space on top of jar.
Now if the water don't boil with this modification I still don't understand how the hydrostatic pressure
behave in this situation. And in my last drawings I try try figure this out.
ps.
In first pictures this modification means that the pressure tank will be 8 meter and the pool must be
decreased also e.g. to 5 meters. This means that there will be less pistons in the machine and of course
this will also change the pressures used in machine. But still the main idea remains as same.
Have you seen this before?
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/themes/buoyant.htm
Quote from: truth on January 25, 2009, 02:20:42 PM
Have you seen this before?
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/themes/buoyant.htm
that guy should rewrite the explanation. he seems to be confused himself. he says;
""Therefore both of these devices should turn counterclockwise""
referring to the first design under "Buoyant Wheels and Belts", even the arrows show a clockwise direction.
with statements like that, how can anyone follow what he is trying to say? even if he is right, you wouldn't know it from his writting.
tom
edit:
"During this time, air is forced upward through the tube from the bottom piston to the top one. The piston chamber at the top gains a volume of air V. The one at the bottom loses a volume of air V."
clearly he doesn't understand how this unit is designed to works.
@ t bird,
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/home.htm
There you will find his email and can point out the error to him. I am sure he will be happy to get it right.
If a mass is hanging from a string and it is at the level of a surface below it, will it EVER have the ability to exert the full force of its full weight on BOTH the string and surface at the same time?
Extra credit:
If that straw full of water being held up by a thumb over the top has a normally buoyant object placed in the bottom of it, will it rise in the straw?
How about if the buoyant object is already in there before the thumb is placed over the straw?
Quote from: truth on January 25, 2009, 02:20:42 PM
Have you seen this before?
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/themes/buoyant.htm
Truth,
Remember when you posted 1 + 1 and time = infinity ?
So many ways that can work. In reality, it is limited.
One way is Albert Einstein + friend and clocks = Theory of Relativity.
I think it was in Salzburg, Austria where Einstein was talking to a friend of his about his ideas of relativity.
I think they were standing on a hill where they could see the town and Einstein was looking at different clocks on building or on steeples in town when he realized something. That velocity and time were linked. This lead to what is termed "Einstein's Miraculous Year" in which he wrote about 4 different papers that in time became what most of physics today is based on.
One example is that if a clock travels in space at a high rate of speed, that the time it measures will be less than that that passes on the Earth. This has been proven.
Guess it depends on how much about history someone is aware of what potential something might have ;)
Let us keep things in context;
The math of procreation is 1 = 1 = time = 0 up to possible blood line
History or an other TRUE information is a good thing.
I do try to keep my posts on the subject matter of the thread, and i would invite you to do the same.
:)
This idea and my thoughts about pressure differences are totally busted !!!
I realised that I had a mistake in my thinking. In sea the pressure at one meter depth is
hydrostatic pressure + pressure from atmosphere. In jar that have a vacuum/negative pressure
at the top of jar atmosphere pressure is missing. This means that in jar where airpressure
push water to jar the hydrostatic pressure at the bottom of jar (base water level) is equal
to atmosphere pressure. ;D ;D
Quote from: Gravitator on January 27, 2009, 12:10:17 PM
This idea and my thoughts about pressure differences are totally busted !!!
I realised that I had a mistake in my thinking. In sea the pressure at one meter depth is
hydrostatic pressure + pressure from atmosphere. In jar that have a vacuum/negative pressure
at the top of jar atmosphere pressure is missing. This means that in jar where airpressure
push water to jar the hydrostatic pressure at the bottom of jar (base water level) is equal
to atmosphere pressure. ;D ;D
Well Gravitator
It's back to the drawing board then, and nothing to be embarrassed about either it is just part of the grind on this quest.
Good luck on the next project.
Quote from: Gravitator on January 27, 2009, 12:10:17 PM
This idea and my thoughts about pressure differences are totally busted !!!
I realised that I had a mistake in my thinking. In sea the pressure at one meter depth is
hydrostatic pressure + pressure from atmosphere. In jar that have a vacuum/negative pressure
at the top of jar atmosphere pressure is missing. This means that in jar where airpressure
push water to jar the hydrostatic pressure at the bottom of jar (base water level) is equal
to atmosphere pressure. ;D ;D
Congratulations Gravitator,
It was all worth it then. You started with an idea, put it out there and watched other people tear it apart. Many people get angry and defensive, not you. You wisely used the experience to learn. Now you are miles in front. Keep it up in this spirit and you will become a good scientist and inventor. When someone proves us wrong we have a great opportunity to learn, you seem to know that.
Great to see.
Hans von Lieven
That goes both ways, inventors should clearly state why there invention will work and critic’s should clearly state why it will not.
Quote from: truth on January 27, 2009, 07:42:42 AM
Let us keep things in context;
The math of procreation is 1 = 1 = time = 0 up to possible blood line
History or an other TRUE information is a good thing.
I do try to keep my posts on the subject matter of the thread, and i would invite you to do the same.
:)
When you posted your math, was biology being discussed ? So why complain when I mention that without you giving your math a specific frame of reference, if I infer incorrectly your meaning.
I'd suggest in the future that you give other people a better idea of what you mean. I don't know you. So I wouldn't know what you were trying to discuss. Considering that it was biology, not sure why I should have thought of that.
Dear BA,
1 + 1 + time can = 0 up to blood line
You were asked about your goal. Specifically if it was the history of Bessler or the future of overunity.
Your response was was that your goal was to find a girl and live a quiet life.
I responded that the math of procreation is overunity.
From this and other postings of yours under BAHAMMER and PMOTION I have come to understand that you have some psychosocial issues that interfere with your ability to focus and interact appropriately.
I do hope that have been seeking help or at least do so in the future.
No offense or anything, but I follow this site to challenge my ideas of free energy possibilities, and you are not contributing anything helpful to that goal.
I respect your right to your own opinion and personality, but I most likely will not respond to anymore argumentative posters.
Good luck in whatever you do. :)
Quote from: truth on January 28, 2009, 08:59:54 AM
Dear BA,
1 + 1 + time can = 0 up to blood line
You were asked about your goal. Specifically if it was the history of Bessler or the future of overunity.
Your response was was that your goal was to find a girl and live a quiet life.
I responded that the math of procreation is overunity.
From this and other postings of yours under BAHAMMER and PMOTION I have come to understand that you have some psychosocial issues that interfere with your ability to focus and interact appropriately.
I do hope that have been seeking help or at least do so in the future.
No offense or anything, but I follow this site to challenge my ideas of free energy possibilities, and you are not contributing anything helpful to that goal.
I respect your right to your own opinion and personality, but I most likely will not respond to anymore argumentative posters.
Good luck in whatever you do. :)
Be careful truth
When he gets mad at someone, he will never leave you alone IMO. I am writing this so out of spite with me he might leave you alone for he hates me more.
Good luck
Quote from: Gravitator on January 27, 2009, 12:10:17 PM
This idea and my thoughts about pressure differences are totally busted !!!
I realised that I had a mistake in my thinking. In sea the pressure at one meter depth is
hydrostatic pressure + pressure from atmosphere. In jar that have a vacuum/negative pressure
at the top of jar atmosphere pressure is missing. This means that in jar where airpressure
push water to jar the hydrostatic pressure at the bottom of jar (base water level) is equal
to atmosphere pressure. ;D ;D
http://concrete-submarine-hull.blogspot.com/