network profile
| bio | website | |
|---|---|---|
| location | ||
| age | ||
| visits | member for | 9 months |
| seen | Apr 25 at 17:01 | |
| stats | profile views | 3 |
|
Apr 25 |
comment |
Infinite Energy from Bobbing Thank you for your interest in this question. I think you're right that realistically the device would probably just spin around and not charge the battery. What I wanted to get at was fundamentals of the question which is basically, assume that you can store the energy of the spinning propeller as it rises isn't there some distance it could rise that would allow it to store more energy than it would take to compress the device to cause it to fall again. I think the answer is no because as the device rises, pressure drops, and the device will be harder to compress probably but math is missing. |
|
Sep 6 |
comment |
Infinite Energy from Bobbing If it's so trivial then just explain it. If not, you're full of it. |
|
Sep 6 |
comment |
Infinite Energy from Bobbing That doesn't make sense. You have to show it. Do some math. |
|
Sep 5 |
comment |
Infinite Energy from Bobbing I edited the question to add some math to help. Can you justify your common sense mathematically like I have justified mine above? |
|
Sep 5 |
revised |
Infinite Energy from Bobbing Added mathematical support. |
|
Sep 5 |
comment |
Infinite Energy from Bobbing I'm not arguing that there will be energy loss due to heat, turbulence, drag, etc. but show HOW that loss creates a NET loss on the system. You're just regurgitating what you've heard before instead of actually applying it to this application. |
|
Sep 2 |
comment |
Infinite Energy from Bobbing But it also includes an air compressor which makes this not so trivial. Does the amount of work the air compressor needs to compress the air increase as the device rises? If not, there should be a distance the device can rise that would generate more potential energy than the amount of energy the air compressor would need. |
|
Aug 31 |
awarded | Citizen Patrol |
|
Aug 25 |
comment |
Infinite Energy from Bobbing Ok, I edited it to ask a specific question. |
|
Aug 25 |
revised |
Infinite Energy from Bobbing added 18 characters in body |
|
Aug 24 |
awarded | Editor |
|
Aug 23 |
revised |
Infinite Energy from Bobbing deleted 101 characters in body |
|
Aug 23 |
comment |
Infinite Energy from Bobbing This isn't the same exact content as "What is the fallacy in this infinite motion machine?". The two indeed seem the same but the implementation is much different. This implementation involves changing shape for the effect of motion. The other one just thinks that the water will pull up the balls magically... |
|
Aug 23 |
comment |
Infinite Energy from Bobbing Okay but the point of positing is to provide this proof. Otherwise your answer isn't very helpful. |
|
Aug 22 |
asked | Infinite Energy from Bobbing |
