Have I found the world's first endless source of energy?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Femme_physics
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy Source
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of a perpetual motion machine, specifically a proposed device utilizing buoyancy to create a never-ending source of energy. Participants explore the feasibility of the design, address potential issues, and reference historical examples of similar claims.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant claims that the floats will maintain rotation due to buoyancy, suggesting a potential endless energy source.
  • Another participant questions how to prevent water from leaking out of a one-way valve, suggesting that friction could counteract any energy generated.
  • A participant proposes that using a rubbery material for the valve could prevent leaking, but reiterates concerns about friction.
  • Another response suggests modifications to the design, including cylindrical floats and a mechanical iris to reduce friction, while arguing that the net force on the floats will always be downward, challenging the feasibility of the machine.
  • One participant reflects on the conservation of energy, stating that the energy required to push a float into the fluid is the same regardless of the method used, implying that the machine cannot work.
  • Several participants engage in a light-hearted exchange about language recognition, which diverges from the main technical discussion.
  • A moderator notes that discussions of perpetual motion machines are banned, leading to the thread's closure.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the feasibility of the proposed machine, with some supporting its potential and others arguing against it based on principles of physics. The discussion remains unresolved as it is ultimately closed due to forum rules regarding perpetual motion machines.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes references to historical examples of perpetual motion claims, such as the Keely machine, and highlights the challenges of friction and energy conservation in the proposed design. The conversation also shifts to unrelated topics, which may detract from the technical focus.

Femme_physics
Gold Member
Messages
2,548
Reaction score
1
http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/6178/ladno.jpg

The floats, thanks to the principles of buoyancy, will keep ascending, maintaining the rotation of the wheel, thus achieving the world's first neverending source of energy!

Or, perhaps, there is a catch? ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Science news on Phys.org
how will you prevent the water from leaking out of your one-way valve? :-)

I think the friction at that point will counteract any energy.

There's a historical scam I saw recently called the Keely machine (mysteries of the museum show on US cable) for interesting reading:

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

It was later found that he had a pump hidden in another room powering the device.
 
jedishrfu said:
how will you prevent the water from leaking out of your one-way valve? :-)

The valve is made out of rubbery or rubbery-like material that only allows the floats in. Leaking is not a problem.

I think the friction at that point will counteract any energy.

We reduce friction by using the right materials, as long as we have an endless source that generates energy friction should not be an issue.
 
jedishrfu said:
how will you prevent the water from leaking out of your one-way valve? :-)
Easy enough with some modifications. Make floats cylindrical. That would allow constant aperture at the bottom of container. Replace valve with a mechanical iris that opens and closes almost instantly as necessary. The friction in the iris can be reduced arbitrarily, making it work without losses. The control could be electronic. Again, power consumption can be made arbitrarily low.

So the construction is absolutely possible. That's not the problem.

The problem is that the float only floats when surrounded by liquid from all directions. What happens to the float that's passing into the container through the iris? Well, it experiences full pressure of the fluid from above and none from below. The net force will be down. It's very easy to show that no matter how many floats are in the fluid above it, the downward force on the bottom float will always be greater. (To fit more floats, you need a higher water column, resulting in higher pressure on bottom float.)

The conservation of energy actually becomes immediately apparent if you try to figure out how much work you need to do against the float to push it into the fluid through the bottom valve/iris. The amount of energy needed to take the float from outside and put it at the bottom of container is exactly the same regardless of whether you force the float into liquid from above or from bellow. The difference of potential energies in two situations is exactly the same, and so the energy requirement is the same regardless of path.

Long story short, the machine can't work, which really shouldn't be a surprise.
 
K^2 said:
Easy enough with some modifications. Make floats cylindrical. That would allow constant aperture at the bottom of container. Replace valve with a mechanical iris that opens and closes almost instantly as necessary. The friction in the iris can be reduced arbitrarily, making it work without losses. The control could be electronic. Again, power consumption can be made arbitrarily low.

So the construction is absolutely possible. That's not the problem.

The problem is that the float only floats when surrounded by liquid from all directions. What happens to the float that's passing into the container through the iris? Well, it experiences full pressure of the fluid from above and none from below. The net force will be down. It's very easy to show that no matter how many floats are in the fluid above it, the downward force on the bottom float will always be greater. (To fit more floats, you need a higher water column, resulting in higher pressure on bottom float.)

The conservation of energy actually becomes immediately apparent if you try to figure out how much work you need to do against the float to push it into the fluid through the bottom valve/iris. The amount of energy needed to take the float from outside and put it at the bottom of container is exactly the same regardless of whether you force the float into liquid from above or from bellow. The difference of potential energies in two situations is exactly the same, and so the energy requirement is the same regardless of path.

Long story short, the machine can't work, which really shouldn't be a surprise.



:redface: o:)

Well done!

Truth is my teacher gave us that riddle in class to see how well we remembered hydraulics (turned out we didn't, heh), I just thought it was cool and wanted to have the full explanation written down, so I decided to post it here in the fashion that I did :wink:

Thanks for playing along and for providing it :smile:
 
If you don't mind me asking, what language is that, besides English and Russian?
 
K^2 said:
If you don't mind me asking, what language is that, besides English and Russian?

That would be Hebrew :) Me and my friends are trilinguals. I keep that paper to pose that question to those who only know one of those languages.
 
I also have some trilingual friends, and they would be upset with me for not recognizing it.
 
I recognized the font and can understand every language known except Greek :-)
 
  • #10
jedishrfu said:
I recognized the font and can understand every language known except Greek :-)

Yeah, me too, they are all Greek to me.
 
  • #11
Integral said:
Yeah, me too, they are all Greek to me.

Ba-dum (drum roll for the closed captioning service)
 
  • #12
Please re-read the Rules link at the top of the page. There is a section on banned topics, and they include discussions of perpetual motion machines (PMMs).

Thread is locked.
 
  • #13

Similar threads

  • · Replies 152 ·
6
Replies
152
Views
12K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
8K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
29
Views
6K
  • · Replies 69 ·
3
Replies
69
Views
17K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
3K