Ultimate energy source

Andylusion

Gold Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2014
Messages
17,986
Reaction score
3,759
Points
290
Location
Central Ohio
In any case, I believe that alternative energy sources are the best potential energy sources!
Moreover, the niche of alternative energy sources is developing more and more every day. Every day there are new methods of generating energy using the power of nature.
For example, the well-known solar panels were made portable. Yep, portable solar panels
Indeed, it is very convenient because you can take this panel with you anywhere and it will satisfy your energy needs!
Do you still think that alternative energy sources suck?
For the most part, yes.

There are certain specific situations where alternative energy is fine.

I read where a guy had a million acres of land, and he would move his cattle around on the land, but there was no electricity. But he had a shack out by a stream. So he put some solar panels on the roof, and had a water turbine in the stream, and voila! Power almost year round.

That said, other than a tiny fridge, and a laptop, and a few expensive LED lights.... you couldn't do much.

And if you used everything, you would go dead on power.

At the same time, I know another guy that bought a full roof Solar panel system for his house, dropped thousands on thousand on thousands, and after it was all said and done, he spent $10,000, found he was only saving a few hundred bucks a year.

Then, and I this is crazy.... the system burnt out the inverter, which caused him another thousand to replace, and not even a year later, he suspects a squirrel or some other rodent, chewed on a panel, shorted out the entire system, and they said he'd have to replace every single panel.

He sold it as salvage, and never looked back.

Alternative energy has a very limited use in my book. At the very best, it is a additional source of power, not really an "alternative".

And honestly, the day the US government runs out of money to fund green energy, the entire market will disappear like a ghost. No one would buy a single solar panel anywhere, if it wasn't for the government money involved. You take away those energy credits, and green energy grants, and the tax incentives....

The market would cease to exist in a single day.
 

Grumblenuts

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2017
Messages
3,546
Reaction score
549
Points
140
Okay, I've read the whole damned thing now. Nothing more to add for now..
 

Grumblenuts

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2017
Messages
3,546
Reaction score
549
Points
140
So I notice your variation in balloon radius has been much reduced. This I presume due to added compression at greater depths. Still, filling a balloon under such circumstances just seems ridiculous and the more reason to revert back to your original (non balloon) plan.
 

JoeMoma

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2014
Messages
15,480
Reaction score
2,950
Points
290
Watchingfromafar, once again, what is the purpose of your device?
 
OP
watchingfromafar

watchingfromafar

Silver Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2017
Messages
2,290
Reaction score
178
Points
95
Watchingfromafar, once again, what is the purpose of your device?
You keep asking this and I continue to answer it-
The purpose is to convert the lifting force of multiple trapped air balloons into mechanical energy which is then converted into electrical energy.
Principles to run the machine

[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;
[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)
*** while at the same time it only takes the energy to fill one balloon at a time to keep the combined lifting force of all the balloons running
:)-
 
OP
watchingfromafar

watchingfromafar

Silver Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2017
Messages
2,290
Reaction score
178
Points
95
I encourage someone here or elsewhere to patent this idea and put it to work powering the next generation into the next

How about you—JoeMoma-?
 

JoeMoma

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2014
Messages
15,480
Reaction score
2,950
Points
290
Watchingfromafar, once again, what is the purpose of your device?
You keep asking this and I continue to answer it-
The purpose is to convert the lifting force of multiple trapped air balloons into mechanical energy which is then converted into electrical energy.
Principles to run the machine

[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;
[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)
*** while at the same time it only takes the energy to fill one balloon at a time to keep the combined lifting force of all the balloons running
:)-
I was under the impression that the purpose of your device is to mechanically output more energy (which is not the same as force) than is input to it. Am I correct?

Also, did you take the time to watch the videos about force multipliers that I posted? (#550 & #551)
 

JoeMoma

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2014
Messages
15,480
Reaction score
2,950
Points
290
I encourage someone here or elsewhere to patent this idea and put it to work powering the next generation into the next

How about you—JoeMoma-?
 

Grumblenuts

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2017
Messages
3,546
Reaction score
549
Points
140
Great read there, JoeMoma. Thanks. I'd bet Newman was offered no actual choice about grounding his device. That goes way back as well. So he let them proceed just to see how well it would do rather than just pack up and leave. But why so uptight about grounding? What if significantly more energy is freely available from the environment when all or part of the apparatus is simply allowed to float or accumulate charge like an antenna? That's largely how they shut Tesla down. That's why they still insist upon grounding everything. Unsafe! Can't meter it? No good! Can't profit!

That said, it most likely doesn't really matter. As the article says, people bent on building perpetual motion machines are never in short supply and patents are not a necessity. If one were actually demonstrated to work we'd all soon be building a copy or waiting to buy one. And I agree completely. The only thing more pathetic than a perpetual motion inventor is one trying to get others to do most of the essential planning, proving, building, and testing for them. Technically however, it's only perpetual motion if the plan is to drive the input solely from the output. Otherwise, say if nature ends up providing free energy in the form of steam vents for this thing, it'll just be a machine with a high C.O.P. like a heat pump.
 
Last edited:

JoeMoma

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2014
Messages
15,480
Reaction score
2,950
Points
290
Technically however, it's only perpetual motion if the plan is to drive the input solely from the output. Otherwise, say if nature ends up providing free energy in the form of steam vents for this thing, it'll just be a machine with a high C.O.P. like a heat pump
His concept device is not using any "free energy" from nature. If the energy were being supplied by steam vents, water currents, or some other process of nature, then it might be a workable idea.
 

Grumblenuts

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2017
Messages
3,546
Reaction score
549
Points
140
I agree. I should add that solar panels and windmills requiring little to no maintenance obviously get all their input free from nature. Nothing necessarily gets fed back to an input. The output is essentially free. Perhaps even better than perpetual motion.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top