As close to perpetual motion as we might ever get.

[russ_watters]

It boils down to physics.

Yes, of course - what a useless thing to say, especially since the problem here is simply that you don't understand the physics of the issue.

While it's true that the atmosphere is gaseous, gases obey the physical laws of fluid dynamics. As air flows through the slits in the tube and out through the front of the fan, air behind the fan is drawn through the tube as well. This is called inducement. The flowing air pushed by the motor induces the air behind the fan to follow.

Air surrounding the edges of the fan will also begin to flow in the direction of the breeze. This process is called entrainment. Through inducement and entrainment, Dyson claims the Air Multiplier increases the output of airflow by 15 times the amount it takes in through the pedestal's motor.

I believe the link is in my first post http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/gadgets/other-gadgets/dyson-bladeless-fan1.htm

That's not well worded, but in any case, nothing in that explanation you just gave discusses a change in pressure or power.

 

[WhatIfMachine]

Dyson knows full well you can't put a wind turbine in front of their fan and use it to power it (if only the original flow was great enough), which is in effect what you claimed in your first post.

oh so you happen to know what Dyson does in their labs? I thought they where all about vacuums (and now fans)

 

[WhatIfMachine]

Yes, of course - what a useless thing to say, especially since the problem here is simply that you don't understand the physics of the issue. That's not well worded, but in any case, nothing in that explanation you just gave discusses a change in pressure or power.

I quoted that straight from Dyson http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/gadgets/other-gadgets/dyson-bladeless-fan1.htm

 

[russ_watters]

oh so you happen to know what Dyson does in their labs? I thought they where all about vacuums (and now fans)

Let me put it another way: I have no reason to believe Dyson is a perpetual motion crackpot. He has said nothing to suggest to me that he is, so I highly doubt he has tried that.

I quoted that straight from Dyson

Yes. And the words "power" and "pressure" do not appear in that link, do they?

 

[WhatIfMachine]

Let me put it another way: I have no reason to believe Dyson is a perpetual motion crackpot. He has said nothing to suggest to me that he is, so I highly doubt he has tried that.

so the last few quotes reguarding Dyson and turbines are meaningless?

Yes. And the words "power" and "pressure" do not appear in that link, do they?

might I direct your attention to the quote of said link in the top post of this page?
"Dyson claims the Air Multiplier increases the output of airflow by 15 times the amount it takes in through the pedestal's motor."

 

[pallidin]

You CAN NOT get more energy out of a closed system than what exists in it.
@WhatIfMachine... do you agree with that or not?

 

[WhatIfMachine]

You CANNOT get more energy out of a closed system that exists in it.
@WhatIfMachine... do you agree with that or not?

thats the kicker, its not a closed system. that's why I don't straight out call this a perpetual machine. the extra energy was suppose to come from the surrounding air as it was dragged by the breeze from the Dyson fan which was I thought was a regular fan that was remade to be highly energy conservative.

but apparently I am completely wrong, so unless further challenged I will leave and let this thread die.

 

[Xtensity]

thats the kicker, its not a closed system. that's why I don't straight out call this a perpetual machine. the extra energy was suppose to come from the surrounding air as it was dragged by the breeze from the Dyson fan which was I thought was a regular fan that was remade to be highly energy conservative.

but apparently I am completely wrong, so unless further challenged I will leave and let this thread die.

The closed system is referring to the room, not the device itself.

 

[WhatIfMachine]

well, if that really has anything to do with it, put it outside. any other challenges? in case you haven't noticed I am persistant/ignorant and you might want to take this oppurtunity to say I accept my failure.

 

[Xtensity]

If you put it outside, the closed system is the atmosphere, if not that, just the universe itself. Yes the atmosphere/universe has lots of "unused" energy in it, hence this is why wind turbines are used. Though nothing in the Space-Time Continuum is infinite, that is a logical impossibility. Perhaps outside Space-Time, but then totally different rules begin to apply and a lot of it is just theoretical right now.

 

[WhatIfMachine]

do you really need to argue about this? yet AGAIN it is NOT perpetual motion, so none of that matters.

 

[Xtensity]

You were trying to say it's not a closed system, which it is... it will always exist in a closed system if it's made of physical matter(at least to current understanding).

 

[WhatIfMachine]

but its not as closed as he implied, so it still doesn't matter. there is still air surrounding the Dyson fan, and that's all that matters

 

[Xtensity]

The air has energy. The air is being used by the machine. The air is part of the closed system.

Energy by fundamental-nature tries to balance out. High areas of energy balance out in the system so that the energy distribution is uniform. The reason the Ice in a cold drink melts is because the energy is trying to balance out; the energy from the surrounding air is rushing into the ice causing it to melt into water. When your water is room temperature, then the energy in the cup is the same as the surrounding air.

-When you freeze a cup of water in the freezer, the reason it freezes is because the energy in the water is rushing into the system(out of the water) until the energy distribution is uniform. Though the freezer keeps taking the energy out of the system in there, which is why the bottom/back of the fridge/freezer is hot when you feel it.

Basically even if you somehow manage to pull energy out of the air, wherever you pulled the energy from a displacement will exist, meaning the energy in the closed system will try to balance out the displacement by taking the energy from another source.

read these

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_law_of_thermodynamics

 

[WhatIfMachine]

The air has energy. The air is being used by the machine. The air is part of the closed system.

in which case you don't have to worry about getting more energy form outside a closed system because all the necessary energy is inside the system already.

I will only read your links because I don't often decline new knowledge.

But I'm tired of fighting with you. Notice how you are now the only other person posting? you can't accept loss can you? even if its a victory, you can't stand losing, even to maturity. I already agreed with everyone, my idea is a dud and does not work, I get it now. I will take my own advice and let this thread die.

 

[Xtensity]

This had nothing to do with a "loss" I was just directing you at links you should read so YOU can understand WHY the idea doesn't work. You should at least know why you're agreeing with something besides the fact everyone telling you that you're wrong.

edit: and by the way the only reason I kept posting is because you kept trying to come back with a rebuttal of some sort. You claim that you're agreeing but then you keep trying to debunk what everyone is saying, more specifically about the closed systems. If you don't believe me, search your memory or simply look at the last 6 post on page 4.

 

[WhatIfMachine]

http://psionix.forumcircle.com/viewtopic.php?t=855&start=75

"but I get your point. so now this board is dead? if you agree, you might as well not reply"

edit: and by the way the only reason I kept posting is because you kept trying to come back with a rebuttal of some sort. You claim that you're agreeing but then you keep trying to debunk what everyone is saying, more specifically about the closed systems. If you don't believe me, search your memory or simply look at the last 6 post on page 4

my "rebuttal comebacks" is me saying I understand why it doesn't work and that I don't want to pointlessly fight you, but you keep posting the same stupid posts over and over in a pointless attack after I agreed with you.

 

[alxm]

[link to cook site]

I suggest you start by reading actual science sites more, and sites about 'psionics' less, and then you'll be on your way to making an real contribution.

 

[russ_watters]

so the last few quotes reguarding Dyson and turbines are meaningless?

might I direct your attention to the quote of said link in the top post of this page?
"Dyson claims the Air Multiplier increases the output of airflow by 15 times the amount it takes in through the pedestal's motor."

Again, the words "power" and "pressure" do not appear in those quotes, do they?

 

[WhatIfMachine]

I suggest you start by reading actual science sites more, and sites about 'psionics' less, and then you'll be on your way to making an real contribution.

its just a conversation, no need to coach me in my beliefs

Again, the words "power" and "pressure" do not appear in those quotes, do they?

power/energy same difference and I am pretty sure you know what I meant :P

 

[russ_watters]

do you really need to argue about this? yet AGAIN it is NOT perpetual motion, so none of that matters.

Post #47, point #1: you don't understand what "perpetual motion" means. That's the central issue in this thread - everything else is the particulars of why you don't understand.

in which case you don't have to worry about getting more energy form outside a closed system because all the necessary energy is inside the system already.

Where? You've claimed that the energy of the airstream after mixing is greater than before mixing. So where is this energy coming from?

power/energy same difference and I am pretty sure you know what I meant :P

So you're claiming that the word "energy" appears in those quotes...? Did you even read your own link?

 

[WhatIfMachine]

Post #47, point #1: you don't understand what "perpetual motion" means. That's the central issue in this thread - everything else is the particulars of why you don't understand.

Perpetual Motion: A mechanical motion that produces more energy than consumed

Where? You've claimed that the energy of the airstream after mixing is greater than before mixing. So where is this energy coming from?

the high vibration that keeps the gas a gas and not a liquid/solid?

So you're claiming that the word "energy" appears in those quotes...? Did you even read your own link?

*sigh* let me quote it again...

Air surrounding the edges of the fan will also begin to flow in the direction of the breeze. This process is called entrainment. Through inducement and entrainment, Dyson claims the Air Multiplier increases the output of airflow by 15 times the amount it takes in through the pedestal's motor.

Air surrounding the edges of the fan will also begin to flow in the direction of the breeze.

how do you think that happened? magic? it doesn't say it uses energy, but what else would it use? I still don't see how this makes the said quotes relevant.

 

[cjl]

might I direct your attention to the quote of said link in the top post of this page?
"Dyson claims the Air Multiplier increases the output of airflow by 15 times the amount it takes in through the pedestal's motor."

Yep. That says nothing about the energy content though. All it says is the the output is 15 times the flow rate of the input into the pedestal. What you don't seem to understand is that the output is lower pressure and velocity than the air from the pedestal alone. Just because there's more air doesn't mean that they are increasing the efficiency. In effect, they could have made a much smaller jet of much faster moving, higher pressure air using the same fan, but instead they decided to use the same amount of energy (minus losses) to move a much larger quantity of air with a much lower speed and pressure.

 

[russ_watters]

Perpetual Motion: A mechanical motion that produces more energy than consumed...

You can quote it, but when it comes to applying it, somehow you still get it wrong.

...the high vibration that keeps the gas a gas and not a liquid/solid?

Internal energy? So you think that when it goes through the device it gets much colder? Seems to me that if that were true, it would be a major selling point of the fan (in fact, it would render traditional a/c irrelevant).

...it's also now a perpetual motion machine of the second kind:

A perpetual motion machine of the second kind is a machine which spontaneously converts thermal energy into mechanical work. When the thermal energy is equivalent to the work done, this does not violate the law of conservation of energy. However it does violate the more subtle second law of thermodynamics (see also entropy). The signature of a perpetual motion machine of the second kind is that there is only one heat reservoir involved, which is being spontaneously cooled without involving a transfer of heat to a cooler reservoir. This conversion of heat into useful work, without any side effect, is impossible, according to the second law of thermodynamics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_motion

 

[cjl]

thats the kicker, its not a closed system. that's why I don't straight out call this a perpetual machine. the extra energy was suppose to come from the surrounding air as it was dragged by the breeze from the Dyson fan which was I thought was a regular fan that was remade to be highly energy conservative.

but apparently I am completely wrong, so unless further challenged I will leave and let this thread die.

Nope - if anything, the Dyson fan uses more power than a standard fan for the same airflow. The Dyson fan was made to create smoother, more steady airflow than a standard fan, as well as to be somewhat of a novelty device.

The surrounding air gets its energy from the fan - as it is dragged in, it is taking energy from the high speed flow that the Dyson fan is creating via the base. The air itself isn't contributing any additional energy - all the energy comes from the fan itself. Because of this, it can be considered to be a closed system.

 

[russ_watters]

Nope - if anything, the Dyson fan uses more power than a standard fan for the same airflow.

Yes. Higher velocity flow necessarily involves more frictional and pressure losses than lower velocity flow. In particular, the airflow will lose a substantial fraction of its energy as it exits the nozzles.

 

[WhatIfMachine]

Yep. That says nothing about the energy content though. All it says is the the output is 15 times the flow rate of the input into the pedestal. What you don't seem to understand is that the output is lower pressure and velocity than the air from the pedestal alone.

I get that now, that's why I am trying to end this thread.

Internal energy? So you think that when it goes through the device it gets much colder? Seems to me that if that were true, it would be a major selling point of the fan (in fact, it would render traditional a/c irrelevant).

see now this is what I meant by I don't accept the reasons of failure from a person who doesn't even understand what my point is...

Nope - if anything, the Dyson fan uses more power than a standard fan for the same airflow. The Dyson fan was made to create smoother, more steady airflow than a standard fan, as well as to be somewhat of a novelty device.

you didnt read the link did you?

I can't read all of these posts coming up now, so for real this time, I am not even going to look at this thread anymore

 

[russ_watters]

I get that now, that's why I am trying to end this thread.

see now this is what I meant by I don't accept the reasons of failure from a person who doesn't even understand what my point is...

Ok, well we've beaten this to death and you aren't listening to what is being said anyway, so I guess this thread has run its course.

All I can do is hope you read up on the Venturi effect and Bernoulli's principle and figure out for yourself why you're wrong. Good luck.

Thread locked.