Rosch taking orders on OU Bouyancy device.

[profitis]

Tinselkoala' Clearly, it is
_not_ a heat engine because there is no _source_
sufficient to provide that much heat power and there
is no _mechanism_ by which any heat source could
be converted to mechanical motion in the device'

I can think of a good few mechanisms if electrolysis is involved here but I can't makeout if it is.but as you say the cop-claim is far out wild

[sm0ky2]

I can't make any claims to the Rosch device, it may very well be all a scam.
But if we want to just make blanket assumptions and apply them to all buoyancy devices claiming them to "not work", maybe someone didn't have enough balloons as a kid.

Consider this: a weighted diver under 100 feet of sea water requires a sustained 40 newtons of force to pull him to the surface.
                     
This is provided, using Buoyancy, with only a short burst of 1.6 Newtons of force, inflating his life vest from a CO2 cartridge.

[sm0ky2]

So you think that white tube in the corner is some kind of heat engine? Sources and sinks. We see the white IR panels presumably radiating 4.8 kW of heat power into the space of the building. That means that at least that much heat power must be being absorbed by the white tube apparatus somehow,

Or it could just be 41 degrees in Germany and they need to heat their workspace....

[sm0ky2]

It is very disappointing that you do not grasp the difference between a conservative field and constant force, or the meaning of conservative even when I have spelled that meaning out.You do yourself no favors with nonsense posts like these.

I think what he means mark, is that if you lift an object through the gravitational field during a time of day when the gravitational force is lower,
Then hold it there until the force fluctuates to a higher value, you have a gain in potential energy with no cost.

That should not be defined as solely "conservative". Because it could be used in a non-conservative manner.
    albeit not economical

This difference in force, is the basis for all gravity powered devices. Whether they utilize buoyancy, magnetism, or fluctuations in the gravitational field.

What we should be looking at, is " change in force". And how much energy is involved to initiate this change.

[MileHigh]

I think what he means mark, is that if you lift an object through the gravitational field during a time of day when the gravitational force is lower,
Then hold it there until the force fluctuates to a higher value, you have a gain in potential energy with no cost.

You might pay a price with the slowing or speeding up of the Earth's rotation and/or the changing of the moon's orbit.

The point being that you are making crazy talk.  Does your position relative to the center of mass of the Earth change a bit over the course of a day, perhaps because of the way the tidal waves move across the Earth?  It might.  The question is how much.

Why don't you take on the challenge?  See if you can find any real data about some kind of "wobble" in the position of the center of mass of the Earth over the course of one day and a given point on the surface of the Earth.

Then all that you have to do is crunch the numbers.  Use one kilogram moving up and down one meter as your test apparatus.

Let's see your calculation in Joules gained by this process.

I can take a wackadoo guess for you:  It may be smaller than 10^-30 Joules.