Perpetual motion/Free energy

Want to just shoot the breeze? Forum 42 is the place!

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
vskid
Senior Member
Posts: 6314
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 8:25 am
Steam ID: vskid3
Contact:

Post by vskid » Tue Aug 29, 2006 6:27 pm

Sparkfist wrote:Well everything cost fresh water, so to claim that it cost fresh water is like saying food cost money. Also there have been plans for awhile that if we switched to a hydrogen based economy local fuel stations could use solar power to crack hydrogen and oxygen apart, it doesn't require too much energy to do just a lot when you need to fill a car. Cold fusion is a myth, and until the Brits can get that nuclear reactor outputing power rather then drawing it in we wont have it.
Solar power is extremely inefficient, and I think I read that it takes like 7 years to create the amount of energy it took to make the panels. And hydrogen is weak, too. Hummer made a hydrogen H2 and even with 3 big tanks in the back it could only go 60 miles, yep thats the future. :wink:
I say if not cold fusion (I know its far in the future), maybe super high capacity capacitors that would charge from fusion power plants.
Image

Adeptus
Posts: 43
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 7:13 pm

Post by Adeptus » Tue Aug 29, 2006 6:37 pm

You've heard about the Tesla car company, that have built an electric sportscar powered off 3000+ laptop batteries? :lol:

You've heard about the supercapacitors that are being developed?

Take Tesla's idea, replace the batteries with supercapacitors, that's the future!

As for how we get the power in the first place, to charge them? Solar/wind/geothermal/hydro/etc...
Image

User avatar
atari2600a
Posts: 1330
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 12:42 am
Location: Schwarzeneggerville, CA
Contact:

Post by atari2600a » Tue Aug 29, 2006 6:47 pm

I've seen (on TV) conmercial wind turbines (if I said that correctly), & there's some work being done that could &/or will make solar panels a lot more efficient. I think that's as free as it's going to get (for at least 15 or so years)

If I remember correctly, if you generate enough electricity to make the power meter disc-thingimajig to spin backwards (as in generate more electricity than you consume), the electricity company buys the electricity off you...

User avatar
atari2600a
Posts: 1330
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2006 12:42 am
Location: Schwarzeneggerville, CA
Contact:

Post by atari2600a » Tue Aug 29, 2006 6:50 pm

vskid wrote:...and even with 3 big tanks in the back it could only go 60 miles, yep thats the future. :wink:
I say if not cold fusion (I know its far in the future), maybe super high capacity capacitors that would charge from fusion power plants.
Hm, maybe it had something to do with the 3 heavy tanks... ;)

teraflop122
Posts: 1212
Joined: Sat May 21, 2005 9:06 pm

Post by teraflop122 » Tue Aug 29, 2006 7:42 pm

Of course, we don't know what it (Fusion) could cause, as it's not been actually tested in practice
We have created fusion reactions already, just not *sustained* fusion reactions. Just as with fission, fusion causes the release of all manner of nasty radiation, however it does not produce any lingering radioactive waste.
Hummer made a hydrogen H2 and even with 3 big tanks in the back it could only go 60 miles
This is not because hydrogen is weak, it is because we are still figuring out how to effectively store it. Hydrogen tends to be a gas, while gasoline tends to be a liquid. To store enough Hydrogen, we'd need to pressurize it to possibly dangerous levels and/or super-cool it to a liquid and maintain that tempurature. Some of these problems may have been solved, as I'm not entirely up-to-date on the whole affair.
If I remember correctly, if you generate enough electricity to make the power meter disc-thingimajig to spin backwards (as in generate more electricity than you consume), the electricity company buys the electricity off you...
You're describing a grid-tie residential renewable energy system- usually using solar power or small-scale wind turbines. To set up such a system, you need the power source, whatever it may be, a grid-tie box which cleans up the current and makes it suitable for transmission into the grid, and some paper work from your energy provider. The grid-tie box tends to cost a couple thousand dollars. The power sources vary in cost.

User avatar
Triton
Moderator
Posts: 7396
Joined: Mon May 24, 2004 12:33 pm
360 GamerTag: triton199
Steam ID: triton199
Location: Iowa
Contact:

Post by Triton » Tue Aug 29, 2006 7:45 pm

im very interested in this subject, things like vertical windmills(rather expensive but more efficient and smaller than normal ones) and solar heating can help a great deal in reducing a households dependancy on electric companies, and if you DO manage to make mor electricity than you use it is true that the electric company will buy the backflow from you! i think the power source that could help a great deal on our oil dependancy for the short term is good ole regular neuclear fission, with things like breeder reactors and whatnot there is a big potential for massive output with minimal input, the only downside is the neuclear waste and that would have to be delt with (not buired under mount yucca or whatever) but until a feasible fusion reactor is built it would help a great deal! nuclear powerplants produce only about 20% of americas energy, there havent been any new ones in decades and we all know technology has progressed a great deal since then, more effiient use of nuclear fuels would make a difference. but in the long run fusion seems to be the way to go

User avatar
vskid
Senior Member
Posts: 6314
Joined: Fri Mar 25, 2005 8:25 am
Steam ID: vskid3
Contact:

Post by vskid » Tue Aug 29, 2006 8:44 pm

teraflop122 wrote:
Hummer made a hydrogen H2 and even with 3 big tanks in the back it could only go 60 miles
This is not because hydrogen is weak, it is because we are still figuring out how to effectively store it. Hydrogen tends to be a gas, while gasoline tends to be a liquid. To store enough Hydrogen, we'd need to pressurize it to possibly dangerous levels and/or super-cool it to a liquid and maintain that tempurature. Some of these problems may have been solved, as I'm not entirely up-to-date on the whole affair.
Yes, but as of now the amount of energy produced from a container of it is sad, 60 miles on 3 tanks is not good at all. Our Ford Excusion (monster SUV for those that don't know) could go several hundred miles on a tank gasoline and still have cargo room. A better method of storing it is needed for it to be worth it.
Here is the article about supercapacitors.
Last edited by vskid on Tue Aug 29, 2006 8:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image

User avatar
Sparkfist
Forum Administrator
Posts: 6754
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2004 7:12 am
Location: Michigan
Contact:

Post by Sparkfist » Tue Aug 29, 2006 8:45 pm

In response to the comment on the H2 running on Hydrogen. Really you think that car gets great milage to begin with? It's average MPG on gasoline is only about 12. Further if they were feeding hydrogen into the engine that's not really the best way to use Hydrogen, internal combustion engines only generate a maximum of 30% efficency of it fuel. If they used the Hydrogen to power motors, motors sadly are heavey and as such the added weight will effect millage.

Wind turbines are a nice idea, only thing is the over head cost at first. They can cost several hundred thousand dollars each. Then you have to hope that mother nature is on your side. If the wind isnt' blowing you are not generating any power.

There are plans and prototypes for a turbin that would be like a small aircraft or kite and be flown up into the jet-stream. This would give a constaint air current and so generate power all the time. The only downside they mentioned is that these turbin can't co-exsis in the same airspace as airliners.

As for the fusion reactor. Well a fusion reactor would emmit some radiation it would be block about with less shielding then a fission. Fission worth from nuetrons and those heavy beasts emmit a lot of gamma radiation and that's what you need 6 foot thick walls for. I'm hoping that they get that damn generator working as we could start a new nuclar power revolution, as the first one was killed off by Three Mile Island and Chernobyle.
vskid wrote:Nerd = likes school, does all their homework, dies if they don't get 100% on every assignment
Geek = likes technology, dies if the power goes out and his UPS dies too

I am a geek.

User avatar
totokan
Senior Member
Posts: 1785
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 12:29 pm
Location: 127.0.0.1
Contact:

Post by totokan » Wed Aug 30, 2006 7:28 am

teraflop122 wrote:
Of course, we don't know what it (Fusion) could cause, as it's not been actually tested in practice
We have created fusion reactions already, just not *sustained* fusion reactions. Just as with fission, fusion causes the release of all manner of nasty radiation, however it does not produce any lingering radioactive waste.
Yeah, that's what I meant, sustained. Fusion itself produces 100 times more power than fission, and is much safer, isn't it? There's little risk of the thing breaking down, as the required conditions would be lost as soon as it breaks. The most current working fusion reactor can produce a little more power than put into it, so it's starting to get somewhere...
Shhh! I'm not officially back yet.

User avatar
Triton
Moderator
Posts: 7396
Joined: Mon May 24, 2004 12:33 pm
360 GamerTag: triton199
Steam ID: triton199
Location: Iowa
Contact:

Post by Triton » Wed Aug 30, 2006 7:43 am

they have exceeded the breakeven point for a few seconds at a time with the JET and probably even more with the ITER and he is right about the safety, no long halflife radioactive things made etc h[url]ttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusion_reactor#Safety_and_environmental_issues[/url]

User avatar
Indigno
Posts: 442
Joined: Wed Jul 05, 2006 7:31 pm
Contact:

Post by Indigno » Wed Aug 30, 2006 9:00 am

I believe that you would have created a floating magnet, assuming that there is something preventing the magnet from spinning around and alligning itself with the proper poles.
Getting a tan while everyone else is in a blizzard... >.<

teraflop122
Posts: 1212
Joined: Sat May 21, 2005 9:06 pm

Post by teraflop122 » Wed Aug 30, 2006 3:11 pm

What I want someone to explain is whatever I have omitted that would counteract the force to the right.
The wedge shapped magnet is really several bar magnets of differing lengths positioned next to each other, conceptually speaking. The force on the N side would be directly towards the S rail, and vie versa. If the wedge were only allowed motion as you described, it would not move.

sam fisher
Posts: 1093
Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 8:52 am

Post by sam fisher » Wed Aug 30, 2006 3:44 pm

anotherperson wrote:Just back onto the magnets stuff for a sec: say I have a magnetic field whose flux lines are parallel, and there is a gap in between the two poles, and this magnet extends to the left and right into infinity, then I stick a wedge shaped magnet in the middle, which through some sort of mechanical limit can only move left and right, without rotating like:

Code: Select all

[NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN]

                      /|
                    /N |
<<================ |   | ============>>
                    \S |
                      \|


[SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS]
How will the two magnets interact? Wouldn't the North field of the "canal" bit interact with the North of the wedge, and create a force on the wedge to the right, and the same force to the right on the south side interaction?

Since the field lines are parallel, the interaction with the face of the wedge (which would counteract the forces from the two slanted sides labeled N and S) would be smaller than that force due to the slanted sides, wouldn't it?

What I want someone to explain is whatever I have omitted that would counteract the force to the right.
That's not perptual motion. That's the balancing of forces. Which expends no energy. But it is not helpful as the magnet would be motionless. Also gravity would play a role if it was done on earth and the top and bottom magnets were equal.
Image

User avatar
NiN^_^NiN
Posts: 494
Joined: Fri May 07, 2004 3:54 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Post by NiN^_^NiN » Wed Aug 30, 2006 9:21 pm

Thought i'd chime in here :)

Just thought i'd point out that there are technologys that are taking advantage of the effects of man made structures

There are special wind turbines which use the updraft from the buildings in the city that sit at the edge of the building so it can spin which is useable energy everyday.

They have also used the wind turbine idea for newyork but they are putting it in the sea and using the currents to move the turbines.

The magnets idea is something that has been worked on in the early 1900's and perhaps earlier.

The most sucessful one is using a wheel type design where the magnet is placed on a rod which spins around (think of the wheel on a bike) now this is placed face down so it doesn't have to work agains gravity like a bike thats laid on its side and u spin the wheel.

outside of the rim of the magnet is the opposing magnet to push it away from itself which are stationed all around the circle it travels

This in theory pushes the rod with the magnet around and around in circle like the bike on its side.

User avatar
Gump-in-space
Posts: 492
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 12:37 pm
Location: :noitacoL

Post by Gump-in-space » Thu Aug 31, 2006 9:47 am

My big idea from a couple of years ago was a cylinder in space with that same outer ring of magnets from the first post, but instead of a inner wheel, there is a magnetic peg. The peg streaches out of the box untill the south end doesn't get close enough to effect the machine. A string attatches the North peg to the south side of a magnet, so the north side faces the magnets. As it spins, the North peg spins, as it is pulled by the string.
Gamelver wrote:aw, I thought they were gonna be Gameboys inside the bricks :P.

Post Reply