Power from Gravity
Author
Is it possible to use gravity as a power source? Is it possible to create a mechanism that takes less force to push back up than gravity pulls it down?
If so, why don't we have such power sources powering everything? Is it that the amount of power it generates is too small?
simply because it's impossible! The work used to raise an object up is the same as the one gained when it falls back to it's initial place. Then remove lost energy because of friction and non ideality of things and you'll see you can only lose energy that way.
No, you cant. It will never take less power to pull something up than the power working downwards on the object (aka gravity). usually, the down-power and the up-power (gravity and the surface of the earth resisting that power, which is a power itself) are in balance, unless we move an object, which causes power to be consumed because there's no balance anymore.
free energy buffs here too??!?!?!?!
its since the dawn of humanity that someone wants to use gravity as a regauging force, unfortunately this is not possible.
For you , physics nooobs , i reccomend to visit tom bearden site
and do a serch for G.Modanese and Podlektnov they are deep into antigravitic research, just few days ago the claimed to have developed a gravity beam which creates a force of 20 pounds.
This could be used also for an high performance rotary engine for extracting electricity.
i am very unfriendly rate me
its since the dawn of humanity that someone wants to use gravity as a regauging force, unfortunately this is not possible.
For you , physics nooobs , i reccomend to visit tom bearden site
and do a serch for G.Modanese and Podlektnov they are deep into antigravitic research, just few days ago the claimed to have developed a gravity beam which creates a force of 20 pounds.
This could be used also for an high performance rotary engine for extracting electricity.
i am very unfriendly rate me
Author
I was thinking more along the lines of a spinning wheel which had an odd number of arms attached around the outside of it.
The arms would only bend one way in the opposite direction that the wheel spun, and would have a large amount of weight on the end of them. So when they went from one side to the other, as it reached the top, the arm would flop out so that it was sticking out straight, and the weight distributed far out from the wheel. When it spun around to the bottom, the arm would be picked up so that the heavy end was straight below the joint.
Does that make sense? And would it not work? Why?
EDIT: I've actually built something like this, but I had really crappy components (scotch tape, Cds, sticks, and C batteries!). I think it may have worked if the joints (tape) and axel (CD wheel thing) used less friction, and the weights (batteries) were heavier.
The arms would only bend one way in the opposite direction that the wheel spun, and would have a large amount of weight on the end of them. So when they went from one side to the other, as it reached the top, the arm would flop out so that it was sticking out straight, and the weight distributed far out from the wheel. When it spun around to the bottom, the arm would be picked up so that the heavy end was straight below the joint.
Does that make sense? And would it not work? Why?
EDIT: I've actually built something like this, but I had really crappy components (scotch tape, Cds, sticks, and C batteries!). I think it may have worked if the joints (tape) and axel (CD wheel thing) used less friction, and the weights (batteries) were heavier.
For any field u the following three statements are equivalent:
* u can be written as a potential: u = grad(phi).
* u is irrotational: rot(u) = 0.
* u is conservative: the line integral of u around any closed curve is zero.
As far as anyone knows, gravity is that kind of field.
* u can be written as a potential: u = grad(phi).
* u is irrotational: rot(u) = 0.
* u is conservative: the line integral of u around any closed curve is zero.
As far as anyone knows, gravity is that kind of field.
we already use gravity to generate power, think about "tidal power stations", ok its not the gravity of the earth, but if the moon can make tides on the earth, the earth can make 10times higher tides on the moon. all we need is to transport some water to the moon...
T2k
T2k
hehe.
It's possible to get energy not "from gravity" but using gravity.
Drop things into blackhole,and as they will accelerate they will produce x-rays...kinda like power plant on river...
so by losting things forever you produce energy.(thing that falls into black hole can't be removed back)
Also it's possible to compress earth into tiny blackhole and get a lot of energy as result :)))
seriously,work of gravitational forces are zero for any closed path. End of story.
It's possible to get energy not "from gravity" but using gravity.
Drop things into blackhole,and as they will accelerate they will produce x-rays...kinda like power plant on river...
so by losting things forever you produce energy.(thing that falls into black hole can't be removed back)
Also it's possible to compress earth into tiny blackhole and get a lot of energy as result :)))
seriously,work of gravitational forces are zero for any closed path. End of story.
Author
You guys give up using just the equations? There surely must be a way to pick something up easier than gravity pushes it down. Hell, even the flopping action of my creation almost made the thing spin. If it was well balanced and had less friction, I'm almost sure it would have kept going.
Add some magnetic forces in there as a bonus, and you're set!
Add some magnetic forces in there as a bonus, and you're set!
Quote:Original post by DmytryWell, end of story for anyone who isn't a professional physicist with access to really really expensive equipment. But who knows what the future of physics research holds. I'm optimistic. But I am over my phase of trying to do it myself with Legos... [smile]
work of gravitational forces are zero for any closed path. End of story.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
