• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The energy of the furure

james dixon

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
will come back with a legible version.

The basic idea is a conveyor belt moving in a counterckwise direction stretching down about 600 feet into the ocean.
The drawing shows "V" shaped buckets attached to the cable.

The buckets going down are empty as in full of the surrounding sea water.

When a bucket reaches the bottom, it is filled with air. The air creates an upward force on the bucket/cable.

The collective force of the 12 buckets on the right, filled with air creates a unified force of 1,003,200 foot bounds of lifting force that drives the counterclockwise motion of system.


SEAPOWER.jpg
 
Last edited:

Daemon Sophic

Avatar in flux
will come back with a legible version.

The basic idea is a conveyor belt moving in a counterckwise direction stretching down about 600 feet into the ocean.
The drawing shows "V" shaped buckets attached to the cable.

The buckets going down are empty as in full of the surrounding sea water.

When a bucket reaches the bottom, it is filled with air. The air creates an upward force on the bucket/cable.

The collective force of the 12 buckets on the right, filled with air creates a unified force of 1,003,200 foot bounds of lifting force that drives the clockwise motion of system.


View attachment 28010
Okaaayyyyy. So what energy are you using to pump the air back down those 600 feet? Given the frictional loss of energy from your rising air buckets and the descending ‘empty’ buckets, the machine certainly doesn’t generate enough energy to pump enough air down to the bottom and “power” the machine alone.:shrug: Sorry.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
"1,003,200 foot bounds of lifting force that drives the counterclockwise motion of system."
Assuming that's "foot pounds", it's not a measure of force.
Those are the units of either energy or torque.

That was the kindest criticism I have.
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
The energy required to put the air down there will equal any that is provided by flotation.

On the other hand if you have an air vent in the sea where gas is already coming up say from a crack in the Earth you could capture that on its way up and harness its energy. That would be a rare situation, but there are sometimes vents.

Another idea is called geothermal energy. If you have a heat source like a geyser, you could pump cold water (or other fluid) down, heat it up very hot with the geyser, than bring the hotter material back up and let its expansion push an engine plus transport more cold material down. It might work if you could keep everything insulated and if the friction did not resist downward transport excessively.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
will come back with a legible version.

The basic idea is a conveyor belt moving in a counterckwise direction stretching down about 600 feet into the ocean.
The drawing shows "V" shaped buckets attached to the cable.

The buckets going down are empty as in full of the surrounding sea water.

When a bucket reaches the bottom, it is filled with air. The air creates an upward force on the bucket/cable.

The collective force of the 12 buckets on the right, filled with air creates a unified force of 1,003,200 foot bounds of lifting force that drives the counterclockwise motion of system.


View attachment 28010
I'll await your actual experiment with gleeful anticipation in hopes for your success.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
The energy required to put the air down there will equal any that is provided by flotation.

On the other hand if you have an air vent in the sea where gas is already coming up say from a crack in the Earth you could capture that on its way up and harness its energy. That would be a rare situation, but there are sometimes vents.

Another idea is called geothermal energy. If you have a heat source like a geyser, you could pump cold water (or other fluid) down, heat it up very hot with the geyser, than bring the hotter material back up and let its expansion push an engine plus transport more cold material down. It might work if you could keep everything insulated and if the friction did not resist downward transport excessively.
I've always been a proponent for geothermal energy. If I could I would have moved to a place where I would have built an underground house that would take advantage of geothermal energy for which I could have it designed to keep the house very very warm in the winter and very cool in the summer almost for free.

Not to mention the massive benefits of geothermal power plants Etc.

Now that's clean energy.
 

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
will come back with a legible version.

The basic idea is a conveyor belt moving in a counterckwise direction stretching down about 600 feet into the ocean.
The drawing shows "V" shaped buckets attached to the cable.

The buckets going down are empty as in full of the surrounding sea water.

When a bucket reaches the bottom, it is filled with air. The air creates an upward force on the bucket/cable.

The collective force of the 12 buckets on the right, filled with air creates a unified force of 1,003,200 foot bounds of lifting force that drives the counterclockwise motion of system.


View attachment 28010

what is the energy needed to force air down 600 feet into water and displace the water? what about frictional loss of the buckets moving through 1200 feet of water (600 feet down, 600 feet back up)?
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
will come back with a legible version.

The basic idea is a conveyor belt moving in a counterckwise direction stretching down about 600 feet into the ocean.
The drawing shows "V" shaped buckets attached to the cable.

The buckets going down are empty as in full of the surrounding sea water.

When a bucket reaches the bottom, it is filled with air. The air creates an upward force on the bucket/cable.

The collective force of the 12 buckets on the right, filled with air creates a unified force of 1,003,200 foot bounds of lifting force that drives the counterclockwise motion of system.


View attachment 28010

IKFiu.jpg


.
 

shmogie

Well-Known Member
I've always been a proponent for geothermal energy. If I could I would have moved to a place where I would have built an underground house that would take advantage of geothermal energy for which I could have it designed to keep the house very very warm in the winter and very cool in the summer almost for free.

Not to mention the massive benefits of geothermal power plants Etc.

Now that's clean energy.
My house is completely solar. It works exceptionally well and saves a lot of money on electric bills.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
"The energy of the furure"? Godwin's law in the thread title?

Anyway, I was wondering if this might work:


Get a million of these guys running on wheels, how much power can be generated?

Or maybe something like this, inspired by the movie Logan's Run:

290379__59084.1349960795.380.500.jpg


"Must be part of the power system. The ocean tides are turned into energy somehow."
 

james dixon

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
The idea is to get energy from the rising force of air in water. (seawater)

But I made some number errors that need correcting

Instead of a lifting force of 1,003,200-foot pounds it should have been 501,600 foot pounds

The voltage output should be 421,3440 volts

The idea shown above is using the combined lifting force of air to drive generators. The power could be used on site or cabled to shore.

BTW:

But I made some number errors that need correcting

Instead of a lifting force of 1,003,200-foot pounds it should have been 501,600 foot pounds

The voltage output should be 4,213,440 volts

:)-
 

james dixon

Well-Known Member
Premium Member

Your drawing was great except for one flaw. the balls (buckets) going down on the left are empty, full of surrounding seawater. The buckets are filled with air at the bottom which creates the lifting force.

Still I liked your drawing LOL :)-
 

james dixon

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
"1,003,200 foot bounds of lifting force that drives the counterclockwise motion of system."
Assuming that's "foot pounds", it's not a measure of force.

Those are the units of either ergy or torque.

That was the kindest criticism I have.
Torque_animation.gif


Torque, moment, or moment of force is the rotational equivalent of linear force.[1] The concept originated with the studies of Archimedes on the usage of levers. Just as a linear force is a push or a pull, a torque can be thought of as a twist to an object. The symbol for torque is typically {\displaystyle {\boldsymbol {\tau }}}
beb1359149db88a28c86f0a3030894b71610a224
, the lowercase Greek letter tau. When being referred to asmoment of force, it is commonly denoted by M.\\

The foot pound-force (symbol: ft⋅lbf or ft⋅lb)[1] is a unit of work or energy in the Engineering and Gravitational Systems in United States customary and imperial units of measure. It is the energy transferred upon applying a force of one pound-force (lbf) through a linear displacement of one foot. The corresponding SI unit is the joule.

The joule (/dʒuːl/; symbol: J) is a derived unit of energy in the International System of Units.[1] It is equal to the energy transferred to (or work done on) an object when a force of one newton acts on that object in the direction of its motion through a distance of one metre (1 newton metre or N⋅m). It is also the energy dissipated as heat when an electric current of one ampere passes through a resistance of one ohmfor one second. It is named after the English physicist James Prescott Joule (1818–1889).[2][3][4]
 
Last edited:

james dixon

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
what is the energy needed to force air down 600 feet into water and displace the water? what about frictional loss of the buckets moving through 1200 feet of water (600 feet down, 600 feet back up)?

These are very good questions that need answering & I am hoping I can get some of these answers here.

You are right in considering the friction lose and it should be added to the equation but at this point I don't believe it wil amount to much. The buckets are "V" shaped which should reduce the friction. The surfave could also be coated with teflon.
:)-
 
Last edited:

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
The energy required to put the air down there will equal any that is provided by flotation.

On the other hand if you have an air vent in the sea where gas is already coming up say from a crack in the Earth you could capture that on its way up and harness its energy. That would be a rare situation, but there are sometimes vents.

Another idea is called geothermal energy. If you have a heat source like a geyser, you could pump cold water (or other fluid) down, heat it up very hot with the geyser, than bring the hotter material back up and let its expansion push an engine plus transport more cold material down. It might work if you could keep everything insulated and if the friction did not resist downward transport excessively.

I know a guy who heats 6 gites, 12 bedroom hotel and swimming pool by geothermal energy.

He had a 1500 food deep hole drilled and a pair of pipes (joined at the bottom) sunk. Cold water is pumped into one pipe, hot comes out the other.

The electricity cost to pump the cold water against the convection of the hot water is a fraction of the cost of heating the water.
 

james dixon

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Okaaayyyyy. So what energy are you using to pump the air back down those 600 feet?

Obviously the force to pump the are down would have to be greater than the surface pressure of the seawater.
I will try to calculate it and then get back to you.

thanks for the question
:)-
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
Your drawing was great except for one flaw. the balls (buckets) going down on the left are empty, full of surrounding seawater. The buckets are filled with air at the bottom which creates the lifting force.

Still I liked your drawing LOL :)-

Can I use your comical version in other forums?

:)-

Not my drawing. It came from Google images: perpetual motion.

,
 

Milton Platt

Well-Known Member
These are very good questions that need answering & I am hoping I can get some of these answers here.

You are right in considering the friction lose and it should be added to the equation but at this point I don't believe it wil amount to much. The buckets are "V" shaped which should reduce the friction. The surfave could also be coated with teflon.
:)-

The friction will loss will be quite large. Teflon will not really help. All of the buckets must displace water as they rise through the water column.
 
Top