Vanilla 1.1.9 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Technology: Physics

Bottom of Page

61 to 80 of 1184

  1. <
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. ...
  11. 60
  12. >
  1.  
    The general energy issue is this. Imagine a B-field in space (no gravity to speak of) along the z-direction which has a gradient in the x-direction. If a current loop is placed there with z parallel to the vector of the plane of the loop (i.e. the field threads the loop) then the loop will move in the x-direction. Is work being done? If it's a superconducting loop, then will the current change as it moves to different B values across the gradient?
  2.  
    Posted By: AngusIt was woo. It may be possible to get some thrust in fact, I don't remember, but it was never going to be useful.

    Here is something off Arxiv
    Oh, right off the bat that's woo. The rule is that no net linear force (only at most restoring couples) can be generated from any closed system of currents. It's a consequence of Maxwell's equations, so it's The Law. You may remember when I first joined the Moletrap and presented my "floater" (and infuriated joshs with a copyright symbol). The floater was the same as that paper.

    What I'm doing now is using field changes.
  3.  
    Hmm, not so sure. They claim experimental validation.

    I like the work he has on his website. A black hole drive, which I worked on recently too. I guess we have the same disease.
    • CommentAuthorloreman
    • CommentTimeMar 5th 2014
     
    Anyone else remember these? Why can't something like this be used on a large scale to store the energy of lifting all the marbles to the top?
  5.  
    Posted By: Andrew PalfreymanNow I need to figure out the maximum tolerable mass density.
    Taking something like a nominal 5 gm/cc I need about 10 uT between top and bottom. With less density I can tolerate less delta-B and still get lift. So...to the poles! (and use the Earth dipole model).

    The shape I'm using is a semicircle of superconducting wire, with the flat diameter side up top and horizontal. There may be more optimal curves, but that's going to be a second order improvement, I'd guess. At some point the optimality of the curve needs to be derived mathematically. Brave souls are welcome to try - my variational calculus is to shit, to be quite frank.
    • CommentAuthortinker
    • CommentTimeMar 5th 2014
     
    Triangles come to mind. Any colour you like.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeMar 5th 2014
     
    Posted By: loremanAnyone else rememberthese?Why can't something like this be used on a large scale to store the energy of lifting all the marbles to the top?


    'cause marble-pumps are very expensive compared to water-pumps.
    • CommentAuthorloreman
    • CommentTimeMar 5th 2014
     
    Posted By: Angus
    Posted By: loremanAnyone else rememberthese?Why can't something like this be used on a large scale to store the energy of lifting all the marbles to the top?


    'cause marble-pumps are very expensive compared to water-pumps.


    Who needs a pump. All you need is to swing the thing on a pivot.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeMar 5th 2014
     
    I was thinking about the large-scale part. But to be fair, I have never seen the thing close up. All I know is that it works on marbles.
    • CommentAuthorloreman
    • CommentTimeMar 5th 2014
     
    Posted By: AngusI was thinking about the large-scale part. But to be fair, I have never seen the thing close up. All I know is that it works on marbles.


    You missed the Boob tube in Canada back in the '60's?
  11.  
    Posted By: tinkerTriangles come to mind. Any colour you like.
    I tried that and posted about it. Puce ones.
    • CommentAuthorloreman
    • CommentTimeMar 6th 2014
     
    Posted By: loreman
    Posted By: AngusI was thinking about the large-scale part. But to be fair, I have never seen the thing close up. All I know is that it works on marbles.


    You missed the Boob tube in Canada back in the '60's?


    What you have is a tube segmented into chambers. There is a void running through the centre of the tube. When the tube is tipped, the marbles fall (naturally) but bang and clatter and roll about, bouncing off the walls and each other on the way down (mostly), which slows them up. The idea of the "game" was to manipulate the tube in such a way that the marbles got to the bottom as quickly as possible. It just strikes me that there's a whole lot of energy conversion going on in that tube over time which could be useful.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeMar 6th 2014
     
    Posted By: loreman
    Posted By: AngusI was thinking about the large-scale part. But to be fair, I have never seen the thing close up. All I know is that it works on marbles.


    You missed the Boob tube in Canada back in the '60's?


    Never heard of it, but I was in the throes of my first engineering degree for the first half of the sxties and in the arctic and generally elsewhere for the second.
  14.  
    Posted By: Andrew Palfreyman
    Posted By: Andrew PalfreymanNow I need to figure out the maximum tolerable mass density.
    Taking something like a nominal 5 gm/cc I need about 10 uT between top and bottom. With less density I can tolerate less delta-B and still get lift. So...to the poles! (and use the Earth dipole model).
    Well, failed again to come up with anything practical. The smallest loop size is of order a few hundred kilometres. Bang goes that idea. At least I figured out how to get lift at reasonable mass densities, despite the fact that the magnetic field gets weaker with height.

    Hey Ho.
  15.  
    I have it! The Electron is made of two gamma rays and a negative positron.

    e- + e+ == 2γ

    therefore

    e- == 2γ - e+
  16.  
    By George! that looks like Free Energy to me. Burn the witch!
    • CommentAuthorloreman
    • CommentTimeMar 7th 2014
     
    Witches are made with burning in mind. That's why they come with wicks.
  18.  
    Only east wicks, as far as I know.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeMar 7th 2014
     
    Posted By: alsetalokinI have it! The Electron is made of two gamma rays and a negative positron.

    e- + e+ == 2γ

    therefore

    e- == 2γ - e+


    Palfreyman is right!
    An electron is a negative positron. Therefore by al's analysis an electron is made of two gamma rays and an electron. Subtract the original electron and the two gamma rays are free energy left over.
  20.  

61 to 80 of 1184

  1. <
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. ...
  11. 60
  12. >
Back to Discussions Top of Page