Bessler's idea solved

[ovyyus]

Ah... but isn't solar energy created by gravity after all? The fusion reactions that power the sun are caused by its immense gravity....

Is an internal combustion engine powered by compression or by burning fuel? Nuclear fusion is not powered by gravity.

[KAS]

THERE are a great number of gravity operated machines today! { NOW} Even more than in the time of the pharohs. THINK man, THINK!

Hi James,

I think you are confusing gravity assisted with gravity powered. read my post; I stand by what I said "There are no gravity powered systems on earth today"
Not utilising the earth's gravity anyway.

Bessler's machines were the only ones IMO.

Unless you can name another. "THINK" NOW!

Kas

[KAS]

The laws state that energy can be converted not created, because gravity has potential energy that can become kinetic energy, energy can be converted thus no laws of true physics would be broken if a working gravity wheel is built.

Hi Trevor,
I always think of potential energy as a link in a chain, but its what is at the beginning of the chain that's the most important. We on this forum endeavor to place gravity there but science says "No way". But the truth is, science can't give a definite answer to what is really there;
The beginning and end of the chain is still being debated today;
and its that that keeps me going.

To explore the unknown is the biggest incentive I know.

We say Bessler firmly placed gravity there. Others think he cheated.

Either way, all we know today is that gravity is a usable component, not a source; but I would love to be the first to prove otherwise.

And this is where we disagree, If that happens, I'm afraid the laws of true physics will definitely be broken.

Kas

[greendoor]

Anyway back to subject, water is weightless with out gravity so what do you think the percentage of work done by gravity is in hydro power?

Hi Trevor - in answer to this question, I would say "slightly less than zero".

Work = Force x Displacement. In the case of hydro power, you have to consider each individual water molecule. Starting from a common reference point - let's say the surface of the earth (but it won't matter which common reference point we choose ...). The energy that causes the water molecule to rise into the air and form clouds is solar energy. Maybe some geothermal energy adds to it - maybe man-made sources of heat energy, such as all the water pouring out the back of planes, boats, trucks, trains, cars etc - and people and animals and trees etc, etc. Lots of energy, but primarily this mainly comes back to solar energy, e.g. our food chain starts with photosynthesis, etc.

OK - so because of the consumption of heat energy, the water molecules rise into the atmosphere, where eventually they condense and fall as rain to fill the hydro lakes.

You are correct that each water molecules is weightless if it wasn't for gravity. Because of g-force, the water falling down experiences force over distance, and therefore Work is done. But, you have to consider the total cycle for each water molecule. The Work or Energy (Force x Displacement) required to raise the molecule is slightly more than the Work or Energy you can obtain from the falling molecule. I say slightly more, because in the process of lifting the molecule, some energy will no doubt be lost - perhaps as wasted motion, or sound, or heat of friction.

That's the problem with Energy maths - it's totally based on Force x Displacement. Assuming the force of gravity is constant (which it isn't, but close enough) - then Height is Height. What goes up must come down. There is nothing to be gained in Height, and therefore all Work or Energy calculations must reduce to zero.

If you choose to consider Momentum maths (Force x Time), then things may work out differently. But you choose to use the word Work, which does not take Time into consideration.

[erick]

If we assume that E=MC2 is true than gravity is derived from massive amounts of energy acting on an object. If that energy could somehow be tapped into we'd be in business...

E

[erick]

Ah... but isn't solar energy created by gravity after all? The fusion reactions that power the sun are caused by its immense gravity....

Is an internal combustion engine powered by compression or by burning fuel? Nuclear fusion is not powered by gravity.

Burning fuel? The sun creates helium atoms from hydrogen atoms. The force that facilitates this is gravity. There is no "fuel" in the conventional way we thing of it. That is except for the energy that creates the gravity that forces the nuclear fusion.

E

[Fletcher]

Hydrogen > Helium > ; fission or fusion, or confusion - plutonium or other nuclear isotopes don't need gravity in a reactor, IINM.

N.B. heavier elements are created in stars, so gravity has a part to play but how far back do you reduce the root cause ?

It's pretty plain to see that gravity engines [like water wheels] here on earth require solar input to create potential & then a streaming mass & gravity gradient to exploit it.

[ovyyus]

...There is no "fuel" in the conventional way we thing of it...

I guess you haven't heard the conventional term "fuel rods" used in relation to nuclear power plants?

As Fletcher has pointed out, gravity is not a requirement for fission, fusion, or confusion :D

[Grimer]

but how far back do you reduce the root cause ?

As far as the first cause, uncaused.

[Tarsier79]

confusion

There is too much here! If only we could power a wheel with it.

[Mark]

What?!

I thought that waterwheels were driven by a gravity gradient coerced streaming mass, and that the solar input was merely a reset mechanism... great... now I'm confused!!

Which side of the coin am I supposed to look at?

--------- --- --- --- ---------

Did ya ever notice that the expression that confusion puts on your face is often reflected in the faces of those that see it?

Could it be... contagious?!

[erick]

...There is no "fuel" in the conventional way we thing of it...

I guess you haven't heard the conventional term "fuel rods" used in relation to nuclear power plants?

As Fletcher has pointed out, gravity is not a requirement for fission, fusion, or confusion :D

Fuel rods are used in fission reactors which create energy by splitting atoms. Humans have been unable to create a fusion reaction mostly because we are unable to create enough energy and focus it in a precise enough fashion to get the ball rolling.

Fission and fusion are two entirely different processes...

E

[Grimer]

I've a question.

A Stirling engine can run on ice.

Is ice a fuel then?

[jim_mich]

No, the warmer surrounding air is the fuel. The ice is the heat sink.

All heat engines requires both a heat source and a heat sink.

[Tarsier79]

A stirling runs on a temperature difference. Is there an efficient mechanism that runs off a pressure difference?