Energy in V energy out.

[mart]

Can the same kind of energy input provide more of the same kind of energy at the output side, if there is “something” in-between” , or what is the nearest thing we have to that situation.?

 

[Spark plug]

Lots of people try this it's called free energy among other things.

Do you mean for example, running a 1000watt motor from the mains to turn a generator to produce more than 1000watt?

The problems you encounter are:

The friction of the bearings may use say 10watt, 5watt may produce noise another 5watt will produce heat etc etc...

So now you only have 980watt Bering transfered to the generator, then you have the same noise, heat and friction problem in the generator.

By the time you build a superefficiant generator you need to make up all the ground you have lost in the process before you see a return in the initial energy you invested.

 

[wyn]

That sounds like it would be against the laws of physics.......the "thing in the middle" would also likely take some energy from the original input.

 

[Spark plug]

For example a petrol generator with a 3000watt output will usually have around 5.5hp engine.

5.5hp = 4050watt

So around 1000watts are wasted in the process.

 

[mart]

What would you say is the nearest anyone has come to achieving it?

 

[Fazerruss]

Look up zero point energy. Some inventors say they have cracked it but never officially verified. The laws of physics say you cannot create energy, only transform it from one state to another. eg an accumulator ( potential to kinetic).

 

[BrokenBiker]

conservation of energy states that energy cannot be created or destroyed, only converted, i.e. From heat-kinetic-electrical. The 1000watts wasted in the generator example are released as heat and sound, along with kinetic energy released as vibration and so on. The more efficient the engine the less is wasted, the less efficient the engine the more is wasted.

consumed energy is (theoretically) always more than outputted energy for a given factor, i.e if you are measuring light from a bulb you ignore the heat energy given off, as it is usually minimal.

anyway that is how it was explained to me on my hnc course

 

[rtbcomp]

As above.

Heat pumps give the illusion of creating energy, a 1Kw pump can generate 2-3kW of heat, but the other 1-2Kw comes from the environment, ground, river &c.

 

[chunkolini]

A mate of mine assures me he has invented a perpetual motion machine that could power all sorts of devices.
He seems to be serious, loony.
I think it is a variation on a motor powering a dynamo powering a bigger motor etc with some power being drawn off during the process.

 

[BrokenBiker]

A mate of mine assures me he has invented a perpetual motion machine that could power all sorts of devices.
He seems to be serious, loony.
I think it is a variation on a motor powering a dynamo powering a bigger motor etc with some power being drawn off during the process.

the problem with perpetual motion, although it can be possible, i think you have to have something creating enough power to power itself plus a certain percentage for it to be perpetual, they only produce minimal power such as .02volts with less than a milliamp over what the device requires, and quite frankly you can generate more by waving a wand in the Apollo.

lets face it, if it had been done we would know about it, although it has got me thinking about a basic physics trick we were shown in high school that could potentially be used to create small power outputs

edit, i say pereptual motion is possible, but only when being viewed over a certain time period, i am not aware of any device that can endlessly power itself with no other input

 

[mart]

There is a guy on YT that explains about the H-Cat, but I don’t have the mental adeptness to absorb all of the technicalities as some of you guys may have. I’d welcome your opinions though.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMbh_Bw1dWo

 

[rtbcomp]

I designed an electric train when I was about 10. The motor was in the engine at the front and a generator driven from the wheels in the guards van. A cable connected the two.

Poor old dad had to explain the law of conservation of energy to a 10 year-old.

 

[BrokenBiker]

I designed an electric train when I was about 10. The motor was in the engine at the front and a generator driven from the wheels in the guards van. A cable connected the two.

Poor old dad had to explain the law of conservation of energy to a 10 year-old.

i tried similar with an rc car, i was fairly dissapointed when i turned it on and sod all happened

 

[bump]

If you could do it, I'd love it for powering my racks of servers!

Though the might of Google haven't cracked it yet, and they use quite a bit (admittedly less than most datacentres due to the common rail system).

 

[AndyStobbs]

Average gearbox is pretty efficient.

 

[BrokenBiker]

there was supposedly a Japanese guy killed for 'knowing too much' about this but i thinks its more a conspiracy theory more than anything

 

[voipio]

the problem with perpetual motion, although it can be possible, i think you have to have something creating enough power to power itself plus a certain percentage for it to be perpetual, they only produce minimal power such as .02volts with less than a milliamp over what the device requires, and quite frankly you can generate more by waving a wand in the Apollo.

lets face it, if it had been done we would know about it, although it has got me thinking about a basic physics trick we were shown in high school that could potentially be used to create small power outputs

edit, i say pereptual motion is possible, but only when being viewed over a certain time period, i am not aware of any device that can endlessly power itself with no other input

Superconductivity gets close to perpetual motion. Superconducting magnets in devices like MRI scanners have their magnetic fields built up using a carefully controlled supply of current. When the magnetic field has reached it's design intensity, the contacts at each end of the coil are "closed" to complete the circuit. In fact, the contacts are actually a loop of superconductor across the ends of the coil and the loop is kept above it's critical temperature by a small heater, so has high resistance, effectively open circuit. When the loop is allowed to cool, it's resistance becomes zero and so completes the circuit. The current carries on flowing in the magnet coils for months. The very thin wires in these superconducting magnets carry extremely large currents.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superconducting_magnet#Persistent_mode

 

[MattF]

there was supposedly a Japanese guy killed for 'knowing too much' about this but i thinks its more a conspiracy theory more than anything

Cripes, if I had a quid for every inventor I've heard of whom has been supposedly killed to stop his invention reaching fruition and the masses, (though interestingly, there always seems to be a Youtube video showing the supposed invention, so the assassins the respective Govt's hire must obviously be a bit sh*te at their jobs ), I'd have a few bob by now.

 

[Sean]

What would you say is the nearest anyone has come to achieving it?

a well maintained roller chain( bike chain) can reach 90% that'll do for me
( enough of this quantum super electrickery majick i like to SEE machinery working )

 

[daleyd]

What would you say is the nearest anyone has come to achieving it?

A transformer is probably the most efficient machine in common use, and has some relevance to this forum . Something like high 90's in the % efficiency stakes for a well designed/manufactured one.