The ever elusive free energy device

[crhurd]

The ever elusive "free energy" device...

Hello. Let me begin by stating that I have no formal physics/science training, and am not here to wear a tin foil hat, close my eyes and claim that I've solved the worlds problems. That being said... I have a theory, and I'd like to be told why it wouldn't work.

I'm going to stray from the typical approach of magneticism or the use of electricity as the sole source of energy creation... I can't seem to find any method to effectively generate excess energy with maginets alone... and it seems that the only way to "produce" excess energy from an electrical driven source is by improperly measuring watts vs volts etc...

That being established, here is my theory. Can excess energy be generated by harnessing gravity along with boyancy? See the attached (very rough) drawing of my theory.

The device that would travel through the system would be part magnet, and part air pocket (for buoyancy). As it passes through the coils it would generate energy... the beauty of the system is that you can elongate coils 1 and 2 until you generate more energy than what Energy Points 1 and 2 actually use.

Thoughts? I know it's impossible... I know it violates the laws of Thermodynamics, etc... etc... but I can't see why this model wouldn't work, and need to be shown why my model would not work (OTHER than the simple assumption that it's impossible).

Thanks!

 

[Mapes]

I assume you intend for this device to operate cyclically; otherwise, your power output is going to be approximately zero over time. What are the energy requirements to move the object from the top of the water column to the top of the air column and from the bottom of the air column to the bottom of the water column? You can't ignore these in your analysis.

 

[Defennder]

This is another variant of the bouyant perpetual motion device. You need to exert a force to push the load beneath the surface of the liquid at energy point 2. And bear in mind that by Lenz law, when the load rises or falls at either sides of the loop, the induced emf would generate a counter magnetic field which retards the movement of the load. Think of it as magnetic friction. This makes it even harder for the load to be pushed underwater.

Anyway threads on perpetual motion devices are banned here. I'm kind of surprised your attachment got approved in the first place.

 

[crhurd]

I assume you intend for this device to operate cyclically; otherwise, your power output is going to be approximately zero over time. What are the energy requirements to move the object from the top of the water column to the top of the air column and from the bottom of the air column to the bottom of the water column? You can't ignore these in your analysis.

Yes, that's correct... the expenditure of energy would be in the "valve" at the bottom of coil 1 (this could potentiall be designed to not expend energy? possibly utilizing the weight of the magnet/air capsule to open the valve?)...

The energy usage would be primarily at the Energy Point 2, and it would involve moving the object from the Coil 2 (which has water in order to float the devie through coil 2) back to Coil 1 in order to begin the cycle again. The two major motions would be opening the top of the container (which would need to have been closed so that there was no back pressure after the object hits the first "valve") and the second movement would be transferring the device from Coil 2 back to Coil 1.

I don't know enough of the math or science to actually generate an exact amount of energy that I believe it would take for the top part of the machine... I am curious, however, if I can not exceed that amount of energy by elongating the coils since I can effectively generate a higher distance (thus more energy) while keeping the energy expenditure constant (the coil 2 to 1 transfer).

Am I correct in my thinking? If not, where am I making my mistake? Or is it impossible to generate a relevant amount of energy through gravity alone? (ie; my device would have to be an impossible height in order to even match the energy expended to move from 2 to 1).

 

[crhurd]

This is another variant of the bouyant perpetual motion device. You need to exert a force to push the load beneath the surface of the liquid at energy point 2. And bear in mind that by Lenz law, when the load rises or falls at either sides of the loop, the induced emf would generate a counter magnetic field which retards the movement of the load. Think of it as magnetic friction. This makes it even harder for the load to be pushed underwater.

Anyway threads on perpetual motion devices are banned here. I'm kind of surprised your attachment got approved in the first place.

Sorry... I didn't realize that they were banned! I'll gladly remove/delete my posts...

 

[stewartcs]

... I know it violates the laws of Thermodynamics, etc... etc... but I can't see why this model wouldn't work, and need to be shown why my model would not work (OTHER than the simple assumption that it's impossible).

You've answered your own question. It won't work because it violates the Laws of Thermodynamics!

BTW, I believe you can post this type of question in the https://www.physicsforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=5" subforum.

The rules of this forum can be found https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=5374".

CS

 

[Mapes]

...the beauty of the system is that you can elongate coils 1 and 2 until you generate more energy than what Energy Points 1 and 2 actually use.

I don't know enough of the math or science to actually generate an exact amount of energy that I believe it would take for the top part of the machine... I am curious, however, if I can not exceed that amount of energy by elongating the coils since I can effectively generate a higher distance (thus more energy) while keeping the energy expenditure constant (the coil 2 to 1 transfer).

You've said this a couple times, but I'm not buying it. How does the mass get back underwater? By a door or airlock? This process takes more, not less, energy as the tube height increases, because the water pressure scales with height.

(I realize that you're not advocating perpetual motion or over-unity devices here, but rather trying to understand the flaw in your reasoning via standard physics. I hope this discussion helps.)

 

[ZapperZ]

BTW, I believe you can post this type of question in the https://www.physicsforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=5" subforum.

Actually, you can't. S&D forum is not meant to debunk something that clearly violates current understanding of how our physical world works.

I believe this thread has sufficiently addressed the OP and thus, it is done.

Zz.

 

[russ_watters]

Just $.02 more: Based on your statements, you seem to realize this violates the known laws of physics, yet you still seem to think the device could be made to work. This confuses me. The best way out of this mess, though, is to educate yourself about science, enough to figure out for yourself why such things are fundamentally flawed. Then, not only will you have gained some knowledge, you'll be able to avoid wasting your time pursuing things that can't possibly work. Here's a site that analyzes such devices and does a pretty good job of explaining the physical principles involved: http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/unwork.htm