# The Naked Scientists Forum

### Author Topic: Perpetual motion Device...  (Read 45147 times)

#### NCoppedge

• First timers
• Posts: 7
##### Re: Perpetual motion Device...
« Reply #50 on: 26/06/2006 22:06:36 »
quote:
Re the buoys: The simplest way to illustrate the problem is to imagine, not buoys, but a single, malleable, looped tube, such as a nosepipe, with sealed sections inside. The 'smooth' exterior would help to solve the problem of an efficient seal at the entrance to the base.

However, I just *cannot* accept that the inner buoyancy would be enough to counteract the the level of pressure required to close that bloody seal!

Also: how would an inner section of the 'hosepipe' know that it was at a certain depth inside the tank?

Certainly a smooth tube would have no buoyancy, as it would be equivalent to a pipe strung from the bottom of the tank to the top...

My latest design predicts at least 400% higher pull than entry resistance, depending on the size of the buoys and height of the tank. However I agree that the design I have presented here does not confront the problem adequately.

Your last question puzzles me. I don't see how any buoy must "know" where it is; its an inert tool and nothing more... Maybe I miss your point.
« Last Edit: 26/06/2006 22:10:33 by NCoppedge »

#### Roy P

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 103
##### Re: Perpetual motion Device...
« Reply #51 on: 26/06/2006 23:12:44 »
quote:
Originally posted by NCoppedge
Your last question puzzles me. I don't see how any buoy must "know" where it is; its an inert tool and nothing more... Maybe I miss your point.

I'm not too good at explaining myself, NC, but what I'm trying to point out is that you are trying to connect two separately enclosed systems. You will not be able to combine them successfully.

__________________________________________________________
Roy P

#### ukmicky

• Moderator
• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 3011
##### Re: Perpetual motion Device...
« Reply #52 on: 27/06/2006 00:31:09 »
quote:
On a large scale the machine might produce more than enough power to pump the spilled water back in. This makes sense, because buoys of proportionally larger diameter would have greater buoyancy relative to the size of the guide-wheels.

Turn a generator by hand and see how much resistance you encounter.

quote:
Friction only effects forces in motion. Try to describe to me how I am "giving this machine a push" in a way that is not recouped when a single buoy passes through the lower seal!

The wheels are turning and the buoys are moving against the seal and you also have to take into account that as soon as the buoys exit the water and before they get to TDC of the wheel their weight is trying to pull them back into the water. Also as well as the buoys having to push their way through the seal they also have to be lifted up after they have reached BDC just before they enter the tank.

Also as the buoy is attempting to enter the tank the water in the tank will be attempting to exit placing a downwards force onto the buoy. Basically the water in the tank will be trying to push any buoy trying to enter through the seal back out increasing the energy required to get the buoy through the seal and the larger the tank the the more water presure their will be.

On the smooth tube issue.

If i we're to get a piece of non sinking fishing line ,the type which is less dense than water and is designed to float and strung it around your apparatus would it revolve ON ITS OWN. Same principle

My answer is no, due to frictional losses and because at certain points just before TDC and just after BDC the line has to be lifted up opposing the full force of gravity pulling it down.

Also if you increase the buoyancy force of the buoys by making the walls thinner increasing the internal void  they will then weigh less once out of the water decreasing the level of kinetic energy they will have on the downward drop, so by added on one side your taking from the other.

And increasing the number of buoys wouldnt help either, there will be no extra energy available to the system, even if you had 5,000,000 buoys strung round you apparatus, because any increase in the buoyancy force would be completely opposed by all the extra negative weight and friction you've added to the system.

You can't get something from nothing.
Michael
« Last Edit: 27/06/2006 01:23:27 by ukmicky »

#### Precursor

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 34
##### Re: Perpetual motion Device...
« Reply #53 on: 27/06/2006 16:41:48 »
Ok first lets look at the resistance of the buoys being lifted out of the water and pushed up to the seal.  If the buoy only has to rise a foot to get to the top of the wheel and get pushed a foot from the lower most point up to the seal that means you have two feet of gravity working against you.  Take that two feet and put it up against the (for example sake) 10 feet that the buoys will be travelling down with gravety.  If the buoys are spaced so there is one for every foot than you have the weight of 10 buoys being pulled by gravity working against two.  The ten wins out.  So the two working against you will cancel out two working for you leaving you with eight to be used to over come other frictions within the system.  The wheels will rotate on a bearing so only the weight of one buoy being pulled down by gravity can over come both wheels and then some.  So you are left with the weight of seven buoys working in unison with the buoyancy of the buoys inside to overcome the resistance to enter the system at the bottom.

Linking multiple buoys is not the same as just having a hollow tube.  Each buoy is a seperate entity and will portray buoyancy.  Having them linked together allows them to combine their buoyancy.  To work together.  The reaso why one works and not the other is because with the buoys air is trapped within each buoy where if you just had a hollow tube than the air isn't trapped.  Buoyancy exists when you have air trapped and submerged.  Without one or the other than you won't have buoyancy.

Now it's not my design but if I were to design it I would go with a stiff rubber shell for the buoy and would link them by stuffing them into a stretchy tube.  Between each buoy with in the tube I would fill the space with the same substance as the buoys will be travelling through.  In the buoys I would go with nitrogen.  The fluid I would go with is a light oil that way the oil would coat the line adding to the weight on the downward and would allow for less resistance to enter the system at the bottom by the seal.  Also you don't have to worry about evaporation.  For the seal I would use an inverted, smooth rubber cone type that way there is very little resistance by the seal itself.  The weight of the fluid acting upon the seal would ensure a tight seal between the seal and the buoy containing, rubber tube.

So that would really only leave the resistance from the fluid to be overcome.  The combined buoyancy of the buoys within the fluid should be greater than this resistance.  Even if it can't be more and only the same than you still have the weight of the seven buoys being pulled down by gravity on the outside to turn the device.

As for any leakage that is bound to happen.  Well if this device is hooked up to produce electricity than a drip pan with a floater switch should be more than enough.  That way when the pan becomes full the switch turns on a pump and sends the leakage back into the main tank.

#### NCoppedge

• First timers
• Posts: 7
##### Re: Perpetual motion Device...
« Reply #54 on: 27/06/2006 19:00:54 »
quote:
If i we're to get a piece of non sinking fishing line ,the type which is less dense than water and is designed to float and strung it around your apparatus would it revolve ON ITS OWN...

Thanks, precursor, for being reasonable and seeing that there is no applicable connection between a string of buoys and a buoyant fishing line. While a buoyant fishing line suffers from the same dilemma of equal force on opposite sides that plagues many past perpetual motion designs, this is only because it is inert relative to the capacity of floating and free-falling buoys.

quote:

Also if you increase the buoyancy force of the buoys by making the walls thinner increasing the internal void they will then weigh less once out of the water decreasing the level of kinetic energy they will have on the downward drop, so by added on one side your taking from the other.

While lighter buoys do decrease downward force, they also increase upward buoyancy. The result is that weight has much less effect in this system than usual (partly because there is buoyancy, and partly because the full gravity is only used in the portion that is free-falling).

quote:

And increasing the number of buoys wouldnt help either, there will be no extra energy available to the system, even if you had 5,000,000 buoys strung round you apparatus, because any increase in the buoyancy force would be completely opposed by all the extra negative weight and friction you've added to the system.

Notice again that the buoys with full gravity are FALLING, contributing to force.

Buoys with a wider diameter may not be proportionally lighter when out of water, but they certainly have considerably more buoyancy when submerged.

Once again I'll emphasize that I don't believe the design I posted here necessarily works, but there is a modification of it which I believe can achieve over unity.
« Last Edit: 27/06/2006 19:08:44 by NCoppedge »

#### ukmicky

• Moderator
• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 3011
##### Re: Perpetual motion Device...
« Reply #55 on: 27/06/2006 23:00:56 »
quote:
Originally posted by Precursor

Johnson's Permanent Magnetic Motor. The patent now belongs to a Howard I believe.  Both people have created working models.  NO the magnets will not lose their magnetism.  I've seen that mentioned somewhere and I don't know where they got this but a permanent magnet's magnetic field can only be altered by either changing the temperature of the magnet or by using a more powerfull magnet.
Howard johnson has never built a working perpetual motion device.

And if anybody wishes to prove that perpetual motion is possible then i suggest you attempt to build a working device, good luck

Michael
« Last Edit: 27/06/2006 23:04:25 by ukmicky »

#### Atomic-S

• Hero Member
• Posts: 928
• Thanked: 18 times
##### Re: Perpetual motion Device...
« Reply #56 on: 28/06/2006 07:12:45 »
quote:
maybe if you did a normal fluid, without magnets, and the balls are passing through some sort of a funnel that will let the ball through one way, but will not let the water out. Any water spilled when the ball goes through can be collected in a drain and brought back to the top somehow. That requires no magnetism, and the only energy used to pump the spilled water could be generated by the wheel istelf, and excess energy will be used in whatever you are powering.
That will not work because as soon as the ball enters the fluid through the one-way valve, it displaces a volume of that fluid which is equal to its own volume. It does so at the point of highest pressure, meaning that it must do work on the fluid equal to that pressure times its volume. Then it floats up, recovering exactly this energy (less viscous drag as well as the mgh figure for the ball, etc) by the time it reaches the top. Result: Zero net energy generated.

#### Precursor

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 34
##### Re: Perpetual motion Device...
« Reply #57 on: 28/06/2006 11:03:28 »
I was wrong with the Permanent Magnetic Motor.  Howard is Johnson.  However Howard Johnson doesn't own the patent anymore and the website I came across (which for some reason I can't find it anymore) had the math and graphs with readings taken from a working model along with a link to a video.  So I've came across websites that had Howard having built a working model but with no evidence and then came across this one site that had some proof.

quote:
maybe if you did a normal fluid, without magnets, and the balls are passing through some sort of a funnel that will let the ball through one way, but will not let the water out. Any water spilled when the ball goes through can be collected in a drain and brought back to the top somehow. That requires no magnetism, and the only energy used to pump the spilled water could be generated by the wheel istelf, and excess energy will be used in whatever you are powering.

The design introduced by realmswalker is the one that uses magnets where it's NCoppedge's design doesn't use magnets and is the one that has the buoys entering from the bottom.  Two different designs.

quote:
That will not work because as soon as the ball enters the fluid through the one-way valve, it displaces a volume of that fluid which is equal to its own volume. It does so at the point of highest pressure, meaning that it must do work on the fluid equal to that pressure times its volume. Then it floats up, recovering exactly this energy (less viscous drag as well as the mgh figure for the ball, etc) by the time it reaches the top. Result: Zero net energy generated.

Even if it is pressure times volume if the tank of water is kept narrow as to allow only one string of buoys through than this will reduce the bottom pressure.  Reduce it enough that it would be no different than the pressure at the top.  Besides the resistance would be the weight of water (assuming water is the fluid used) that is equal to the diameter of the buoy minus the diameter of the connecting line and having the height of the water.  So if the buoy is 5 in. dia. and the connecting line is 1 in. and the depth of the water is 5 ft. than the resistance would be the weight of water that has the dimentions of 4 in. dia. and 5 ft. high.  If each buoy is 5 in. dia. and the depth of the water is 5 ft. than you can have quite a few buoys in the water.  Enough to pull the next one through the seal.  Even if it doesn't work out to be more.  That the combined pull of the buoys in the water will only equal the resistance than you still have x amount of buoys being pulled down by gravity.

#### Roy P

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 103
##### Re: Perpetual motion Device...
« Reply #58 on: 28/06/2006 11:42:20 »
My 'hosepipe-with-internal-sealed-pockets' notion was used only to illustrate the problem.

Look. It doesn't matter how many buoys are used -- two, or, as someone else has already pointed out, a million, it will not work!

OK: Start from the beginning, using only two buoys -- one entering the base of the liquid, and one just about to descend. Would that work? Of course it wouldn't!

Now try it with FOUR buoys equidistant from each other. Same problem!

It's a no goer!

__________________________________________________________
Roy P

#### Precursor

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 34
##### Re: Perpetual motion Device...
« Reply #59 on: 28/06/2006 13:45:30 »
quote:
Start from the beginning, using only two buoys -- one entering the base of the liquid, and one just about to descend. Would that work? Of course it wouldn't!

There's your problem.  Yes that would not work because it requires the force of multiple buoys in the water to pull the next one through the seal.  One about to enter while the other is about to descend?  That's your example as to why it wouldn't work?  Seeing as how you don't have any other buoys applying any type of force than yes it won't work.  The system would work because of multiple buoys.

Lets look at the resistances.

The two wheels resistance to turn,
The drag on the buoys as they pass through the water,
The drag on the buoys as they fall outside the tank,
The buoys that have to be lifted up out of the water,
The buoys that have to be lifted up to the seal,
The buoys that have to pass through the seal,
The buoys have to work against the water above.

Now lets look at the forces that will run and help run the machine.

Buoyancy,
Gravity,
Current.

So starting with the wheels resistance to turn, provided they are equipped with a bearing than they would be much like a bike tire.  The weight of one buoy being pulled by gravity is enough to overcome this resistance.  Plus once the wheels are turning it requires less force to keep them going at a constant speed.

The drag put on them as they rise.  The fact that each buoy is able to ascend rather rapidly as I have seen myself by simply taking a volleyball under water and letting it go, this drag will not have an impact.  Also once a current is developed than this drag is reduced.

The drag with the air on the way down.  Drop a volleyball from any distance and see how fast it drops.  Drag from the air will have even less impact than the drag from the water.

The buoys being lifted up out of the water and the buoys being lifted up to the seal.  This combined distance working against gravity would be easily compensated by the buoys being pulled down by gravity.  With lots to spare.

Passing through the seal.  This would have to be the second biggest influence when it comes to going against operation.  Now I recomment a light oil or maybe even soapy water instead of regular water.  This way both the buoys and the seal will get rather slippery and reduce much of the resistance with the seal.  So the only real resistance is stretching the seal.  The seal can be made rather flexable easing this resistance and still hold a seal and the water with its shape.  If an inverted cone shaped seal is used than the pressure of the water will ensure a good seal.  It will still require x number of buoys submerged at one time but I think the excess weight on the outside of the tank may be enough to take care of the seal resistance.

This leaves the number one resistance.  Weight of the water acting upon the seal.  It will require x number of buoys submerged at any one time to overcome this resistance.  From experiments I did in a pool, I'm convince that this resistance can easily be overcome by the combined buoyancy of multiple buoys in the water.  The current that will develop will aid in pulling the next buoy up through the seal.

#### ukmicky

• Moderator
• Neilep Level Member
• Posts: 3011
##### Re: Perpetual motion Device...
« Reply #60 on: 28/06/2006 22:04:53 »
quote:
Originally posted by Precursor

Ok first lets look at the resistance of the buoys being lifted out of the water and pushed up to the seal.  If the buoy only has to rise a foot to get to the top of the wheel and get pushed a foot from the lower most point up to the seal that means you have two feet of gravity working against you.  Take that two feet and put it up against the (for example sake) 10 feet that the buoys will be travelling down with gravety.  If the buoys are spaced so there is one for every foot than you have the weight of 10 buoys being pulled by gravity working against two.  The ten wins out.  So the two working against you will cancel out two working for you leaving you with eight to be used to over come other frictions within the system.  The wheels will rotate on a bearing so only the weight of one buoy being pulled down by gravity can over come both wheels and then some.  So you are left with the weight of seven buoys working in unison with the buoyancy of the buoys inside to overcome the resistance to enter the system at the bottom.

Add to one thing and you take from another.

You can’t use gravity to overcome your friction loses as the buoys will then be to heavy to be buoyant. You can’t have weight and buoyancy in your system.

quote:
Linking multiple buoys is not the same as just having a hollow tube.  Each buoy is a seperate entity and will portray buoyancy.  Having them linked together allows them to combine their buoyancy.  To work together.  The reaso why one works and not the other is because with the buoys air is trapped within each buoy where if you just had a hollow tube than the air isn't trapped.  Buoyancy exists when you have air trapped and submerged.  Without one or the other than you won't have buoyancy.

Yes it is, your buoys are all connected to one line,one continuous circuit.  The only difference is that the buoyancy force is more evenly spread with the tube.
Also a bouyancy force is created when the density of the submerged object is less than that of the fluid that it is displacing.

quote:
So that would really only leave the resistance from the fluid to be overcome.  The combined buoyancy of the buoys within the fluid should be greater than this resistance.  Even if it can't be more and only the same than you still have the weight of the seven buoys being pulled down by gravity on the outside to turn the device.

Your sitting their thinking that an air filled buoy or ten air filled buoys will provide enough buoyancy to overcome all the energy loses without measuring or knowing the actual loses involved or at what points your loses are made,if you were look at the design properly you would realize that at every single point of the buoys travel around the system energy is being lost or should i say converted, even their movement through the air will cause the system to lose something, in some places they maybe minor and not measurable by you but add everything together and you would see that in order for the loop of buoys to turn energy would have to be added to the system from an outside source.
quote:

This leaves the number one resistance. Weight of the water acting upon the seal. It will require x number of buoys submerged at any one time to overcome this resistance. From experiments I did in a pool, I'm convince that this resistance can easily be overcome by the combined buoyancy of multiple buoys in the water. The current that will develop will aid in pulling the next buoy up through the seal.

This plus the weight of the water pushing against the buoy trying to enter the tank would be enough to halt the system alone. Also a volletball may rise quickly in water but imagine trying to push a volley ball through a open volleyball size hatch in a submarine with ten foot of water above you trying to come in.

Michael
« Last Edit: 28/06/2006 22:55:14 by ukmicky »

#### Precursor

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 34
##### Re: Perpetual motion Device...
« Reply #61 on: 29/06/2006 11:11:15 »
quote:
You can’t use gravity to overcome your friction loses as the buoys will then be to heavy to be buoyant. You can’t have weight and buoyancy in your system.

LOL oh my.  So the buoys would be weightless would they?  That if they weren't tied down they would float away?  I suppose those big steel buoys found in high traffic boating areas  must be weightless too if they can float.

quote:
Yes it is, your buoys are all connected to one line,one continuous circuit. The only difference is that the buoyancy force is more evenly spread with the tube.
Also a bouyancy force is created when the density of the submerged object is less than that of the fluid that it is displacing.

Take a 10 lb weight and put it on the bottom of a pool.  Add a buoy that has a buoyant force of 3 lbs.  The weight will keep the buoy down.  Add two more and the weight will keep all three down.  Add a fourth and the weight will be lifted to the surface.  The buoyancy of the buoys add together.  The weight will be lifted off the bottom with an upwards force of 2 lbs.  So no it's not the same thing.  The buoys individually will have buoyancy and when linked together they combine their efforts.  Yes buoyancy is when you have something that is less dense submerged in something that is more but for the example you gave the difference as to why one would work and not the other is the trapped air.  More specifically it's specific gravity.  Water has a specific gravity of one, anything will less will float and anything with higher will sink.

quote:
Your sitting their thinking that an air filled buoy or ten air filled buoys will provide enough buoyancy to overcome all the energy loses without measuring or knowing the actual loses involved or at what points your loses are made,if you were look at the design properly you would realize that at every single point of the buoys travel around the system energy is being lost or should i say converted, even their movement through the air will cause the system to lose something, in some places they maybe minor and not measurable by you but add everything together and you would see that in order for the loop of buoys to turn energy would have to be added to the system from an outside source.

First it's called life experience.  I live next to the ocean and have been swimming my entire life and I can tell you that the wheels would have such little resistance that the weight of just one buoy would be enough to turn them.  Air drag will have an unmeasurable affect and the distance where the buoys have to go against gravity will be overcome by the increased distance where the buoys are getting pulled down by gravity.  As for knowing where and what the loss are I listed them or atleast the one that will have the most effect.  I then explained how each factor would be overcome.  Like drag with the air will have almost no effect.

quote:
This plus the weight of the water pushing against the buoy trying to enter the tank would be enough to halt the system alone. Also a volletball may rise quickly in water but imagine trying to push a volley ball through a open volleyball size hatch in a submarine with ten foot of water above you trying to come in.

This is the weight of the water pushing against the buoy there is no 'plus' about it.  Your adding the same thing to itself.  As for trying to open a hatch with ten feet of water above it, as long as that ten feet only has a diameter of two feet then opening the hatch would require some effort but is more than possible.

Now I'm just curious but what level of science have you taken?  What grade are you in?  Because all that I quoted was babble.

#### Roy P

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 103
##### Re: Perpetual motion Device...
« Reply #62 on: 29/06/2006 13:38:24 »
quote:
Originally posted by Precursor
and the distance where the buoys have to go against gravity will be overcome by the increased distance where the buoys are getting pulled down by gravity.

This is another mistake in your reasoning. You forget that both sides of the line contain the same amount of buoys and are therefore equal in 'weight'.

__________________________________________________________
Roy P

#### Precursor

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 34
##### Re: Perpetual motion Device...
« Reply #63 on: 29/06/2006 14:19:41 »
quote:
This is another mistake in your reasoning. You forget that both sides of the line contain the same amount of buoys and are therefore equal in 'weight'.

Wrong.  One side is submerged and therefore has buoyancy so only one side is being pulled down by gravity.  The buoyancy of those submerged not only counter any gravitational pull upon them but also provide considerable lift.  So it can be said that while those on the outside have weight, those on the inside have negetive weight.  Negetive weight equivalent to their buoyancy.  I have seen myself by taking a ball (about the size of a volleyball) to the bottom of a pool (15 feet) that the buoyancy is greater than that of the weight of the ball.  It is actually the weight of water equal to the volume of the ball or put another way, equal to the amount of water displaced.  So when the outside has weight pulling down by gravity, the inside will have negetive weight equal to the amount of displaced fluid the buoys are submerged in.  So while a volleyball sized buoy may way 2 or 3 lbs being pulled by gravity they will have closer to 15 lbs of negetive weight (buoyancy) while submerged.  If you have 10 buoys submerged at one time with their buoyancy all working together to pull the next buoy through the seal that is 150 lbs of pull.  Would 150 lbs be enough?  Absolutely.

If you were to go with what I suggested (what NCoppedge goes with is entirely up to him since it's his idea) than the seal doesn't have to stretch that much.  My suggestion is to take the buoys and stuff them into a tube.  So you have eight inch buoys stuffed into a three inch stretch (yet strong) tube.  You then fill the gaps in the tube between each buoy with the same fluid the buoys are submerged in.  What this will do is add to the weight on the outside being pulled down by gravity while having no negetive effect on the inside,  reduce the amount of stretching the seal has to do to let the next buoy in and provide a nice smooth curve of a surface around the buoys so the seal keeps the seal.

#### Roy P

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 103
##### Re: Perpetual motion Device...
« Reply #64 on: 29/06/2006 14:47:09 »
quote:
Originally posted by Precursor
Wrong.  One side is submerged and therefore has buoyancy

Nope, you are wrong. They are equally balanced. The inner buoys will be *pulling* the exterior buoys down.
quote:
You then fill the gaps in the tube between each buoy with the same fluid the buoys are submerged in.

Don't be silly. That's like a piston. The buoys will have to 'lift' the water as well as themselves.

__________________________________________________________
Roy P

#### Precursor

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 34
##### Re: Perpetual motion Device...
« Reply #65 on: 29/06/2006 16:42:54 »
quote:
Nope, you are wrong. They are equally balanced. The inner buoys will be *pulling* the exterior buoys down

Ok first you said that those on the inside and those on the outside would be balanced and therefore not go anywhere.  That is wrong.  Yes gravity is still acting upon the ones on the inside but buoyancy dominates.  So the weight of the buoys become not only inverted but addition force is applied.  In short the 2 to 3 pounds that the buoy weighs will become 15 pounds of lift when submerged.  Assuming that a buoy filled with the fluid rather than air weighs 15 pounds. To say otherwise is like saying that a ball when tossed into the water will sink instead of float.  That is just idiotic.

Now you say that the buoys inside would get held back by the ones on the outside falling.  Not only is this also wrong but it goes against what you first said.  It's wrong because any object with buoyancy is capable of falling at a faster rate than ascending.  Take a ball and take it down 15 ft in a pool as I did and let it go.  The ball will reach a terminal velocity.  A velocity at which the ball can not go any faster because the increased drag (that comes with the increased speed) with the water is great enough to counter further acceleration.  Take the same ball and drop it from 15 ft up in the air.  The ball dropped from 15 ft above the pool will reach the surface faster than the one taken 15 ft under and let go.  This is because air is less dense than water and therefore the ball is able to reach a faster terminal velocity.  So will the submerged buoys be working to pull the ones on the outside down?  NO.  It will actually be the opposite.  The weight of the buoys would help pull the ones submerged up.  So really the buoys getting pulled down by gravity would be held back by the buoys that are submerged.  This works in favor of the system working.

quote:
Don't be silly. That's like a piston. The buoys will have to 'lift' the water as well as themselves.

There is a short distance where the buoys have to go against the pull of gravity without being under the influence of buoyancy.  Say that the buoys are spaced a foot apart and that there are ten feet and therefore ten buoys getting pulled down by gravity.  Lets also say that with the diameter of the wheels that there is a combined total of 2 feet and therefore 2 buoys getting lifted against gravity.  Lets add the fluid (equal to that of which the buoys are submerged) into the tube that contains the buoys to fill in the gaps between buoys.  So you have two buoys and two gaps of fluid going against gravity but you also have ten buoys and ten gaps of fluid being pulled by gravity.  Two out of the ten will cancel out the two on the other side of the equation.  That leaves you with 8 buoys and gaps of fluid being pulled down by gravity.  The weight of one buoy is enough to turn the wheels so you are left with seven buoys and eight gaps of fluid being pulled down by gravity.  Here is the key factor.  When the buoys enter the fluid, the gaps filled with the same fluid become weightless.  So you have additional weight being pulled down by gravity and the same amount of buoyancy with the submerged buoys.

#### Precursor

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 34
##### Re: Perpetual motion Device...
« Reply #66 on: 29/06/2006 18:39:17 »
I think I know where you are getting confused with the fluid in between the buoys.  When I say the fluid in between the buoys being equal to the fluid the buoys are submerged in I mean that the substance is the same.  That if you use water in the tank than use water to fill the spaces in the tube in between the buoys.  If you use vegetable oil than use vegetable oil to fill the gaps in the tube.  That's all.

#### Roy P

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 103
##### Re: Perpetual motion Device...
« Reply #67 on: 29/06/2006 20:24:58 »
quote:
Originally posted by Precursor
Ok first you said that those on the inside and those on the outside would be balanced and therefore not go anywhere. That is wrong.

No. What I am saying is that, without the water, the buoys are equally balanced. So your assumption that 'weight' is a factor is *wrong*.
quote:
Now you say that the buoys inside would get held back by the ones on the outside falling.

I did not say that.

As far as the tube is concerned -- it's a no-brainer.

Look. Any momentum gained by an ascending buoy will be counteracted both by the force required to lift a buoy out of the liquid, and the force required to insert a buoy into the base.

It's an elegant proposal on paper, but practically unworkable -- sorry.

__________________________________________________________
Roy P

#### Precursor

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 34
##### Re: Perpetual motion Device...
« Reply #68 on: 29/06/2006 20:44:37 »
Since NCoppedge has forwarded his final design I am gonna post two pics of what I think would be a working design.

#### Roy P

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 103
##### Re: Perpetual motion Device...
« Reply #69 on: 29/06/2006 21:03:32 »
Oh dear; can you not see that your 'tube' filled with water is almost exactly the same as a 'hosepipe' with sealed inner sections, which I used as an illustration in a previous post? It does not work!!

Nice illustration, btw.

__________________________________________________________
Roy P

#### Precursor

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 34
##### Re: Perpetual motion Device...
« Reply #70 on: 29/06/2006 21:58:50 »
The first pic shows the complete design including what I'm talking about with the buoys in the tube and the same fluid filling the gaps between the buoys in the tube.

The eight buoys submerged, provided they displace 15 pounds of fluid each, will have a combined buoyant force of 120 pounds.  This is more simply shown in the second pic on the left side.  Do their buoyancy combine?  Yes it does as I explained with the weight and four buoys.

Now pay close attention to the buoys around the wheels.  The two that are getting lifted out of the water and the two getting lifted to the seal are neutralized by the buoys on the other side.  This is more clearly shown in the second pic at the top and bottom.

Now you have the eight buoys that are on the outside.  These are not submerged and gravity can take over to pull them down.  So as the second pic shows you have one side buoyant and wants to rise, the other side is being successfully pulled down by gravity with buoyancy out of the picture since they are not submerged and you have the two wheels.  The buoys on either side of the wheel will balance the other out creating neutral points.  So there are four areas; one going up, one going down and two that have neither force.

Now for the fluid filling the gaps within the tube between the buoys.  Outside the main body of fluid the fluid in the gaps will have weight.  Possibly more weight than the buoys themselves.  So the fluid filled gaps outside the neutral points will aid in the chain getting pulled down by gravity.  However once the fluid filled gaps enter the main body of fluid they become weightless.  Lets say that the weight of the fluid within one gap is half that of weight of fluid displaced by a buoy.  So that is 7 1/2 lbs.  Going by the first pic the buoys will have the combined buoyant force of 120 lbs with each buoy displacing 15 lbs each.  That means since the nitrogen in the buoys will become weightless outside the fluid, the fluid in the gaps that were once weightless while submerged now have a combined weight of 7 gaps that are outside the neutral points and not submerged getting pulled down by gravity. So that is a combined weight of 52.5 lbs.  Even though it will only take the weight of one buoy to turn both wheels I will say it takes the weight of two.  So out of the eight buoys getting pulled down by gravity two go towards turning the wheels leaving you six.  Lets say that each buoy filled with nitrogen has the weight of three pounds.  That leaves you 18 lbs to be added to the 52.5 lbs for a total of 70.5 lbs.

So with drag being too weak to even consider and the wheels are able to be turned by the weight of two buoys what's left?  The seal and weight of the fluid.  Now if each buoy has a diameter of eight inches and the thinnest part of the tube (since it will curve inward) is 3 inches in diameter than the seal only has to stretch a total amount of 5 inches.  This may sound like quite a bit but you have to keep in mind that you have to divide this in half so each point circumferencely around the seal only has to travel 2 1/2 inches.  As for the weight of the fluid acting against the buoy trying to enter the system through the seal.  That resistance is equal to the weight of fluid with dimentions equal to the diameter of expansion (5 inches) and the hight of the water from bottom to surface.  Now with the total buoyancy at 120 lbs and the total weight of the line (buoys and fluid filled gaps) at 70.5 lbs means you have 190.5 lbs of force working for you to push the next buoy through the seal against the weigh of the fluid as specified.  Is that amount of weight enough?  Yes.

Going by the first pic and having each buoy at eight inches in diameter than the gap between buoys is eight inches.  With eight buoys and eight gaps submerged that means the depth of the main body of fluid is 128 inches or 10 2/3 feet.  So if the buoy has a diameter of 8 inches than the volume of that buoy is 2145 cubic inches (rounded to the nearest whole number).  If the fluid displaced by the buoy has the weight of 15 lbs than the water acting against the buoy (with a volume of 10053 cubic inches rounded to the nearest whole number) will have a total weight of 70 lbs (rounded to the nearest whole number.

That means the 70.5 lbs of weight created by gravity acting on the buoys and fluid filled gaps outside the main body of fluid is enough to counter the weight of the fluid pushing down on the next buoy trying to enter the system.  This leaves you with the 120 lbs of lift.  Do you really think that the stretchiness of the seal can hold back 120 lbs of force?  Not on your life.  Lets leave no margin for error and say that it will take 100 lbs.  This will leave you with 20 lbs of force free to move the buoys.

#### Roy P

• Sr. Member
• Posts: 103
##### Re: Perpetual motion Device...
« Reply #71 on: 29/06/2006 22:17:23 »
You don't read a word of my posts do you?

__________________________________________________________
Roy P

#### Precursor

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 34
##### Re: Perpetual motion Device...
« Reply #72 on: 29/06/2006 22:25:44 »
quote:
Oh dear; can you not see that your 'tube' filled with water is almost exactly the same as a 'hosepipe' with sealed inner sections, which I used as an illustration in a previous post? It does not work!!

Lets take a look.

It could be that either one can work.  The blue is the fluid that is used to in the main body. Now if the segmented tube acts in the same manner than the sleeved buoys than this may work in the favor of the device.  The seal doesn't have to expand so it only leaves you with the weight of the fluid above.  I will have to look into more on how the shape of a buoyant object affects it's buoyancy.  I can see the tube working because the fluid in the tube (being the same as the main body of fluid) becomes weightless when submerged leaving you with 'square?' buoys.  The fluid in the gap can equal to the space in the buoys rather than half increasing to the pull by gravity.  However the displacement is changed.  The fluid filled gaps now displace the same amount of fluid as the buoys and this is what can make it not work.  Having the buoys larger than the tube and stuffed into a stretchy tube this means the buoys displace more fluid than the fluid filled gaps.  Provided that the displacement of the fluid filled gaps counters the displacement of the buoys (although I fail to see how) than than the straight tube won't work where the buoys stuffed tube will.  The buoys would have a buoyancy equal to a buoy of five inches in diameter rather than eight assuming the diameter of the tube at it's narrowest point is three inches in diameter.  This will cut the buoyancy of each buoy from 15 lbs down to 8 each.  With 8 buoys submerged at one time then you have a combined force of 64.  Now I had it so that it takes 100 lbs to stretch the seal but that was to ensure there was no error.  It will take considerably less than 100 lbs to stetch the seal from the 3 inchs diameter to 5 inches in diameter.  I can tell you right now that it will take less than 64 lbs.  As a technician in the military I have dealt with my fair share of seals in regards to hydrolics.  It will take close to 10 lbs to stretch the seal that is needed.

#### Precursor

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 34
##### Re: Perpetual motion Device...
« Reply #73 on: 29/06/2006 22:26:50 »
Is there an edit? I don't see one.

quote:
Nice illustration, btw

Thanx

#### Precursor

• Jr. Member
• Posts: 34
##### Re: Perpetual motion Device...
« Reply #74 on: 29/06/2006 23:09:04 »
Ok I looked into it more and found out that he tube will not work but the curved tube will.  The reason for this has to do with how buoyancy is created.  In a straight tube the force of the fluid acts on the tube equally circumferencely around the tube while gradually increasing as you go down the tube.  Because the tube is straight and vertical then there is no way that the force of the fluid can act under or over each pocket of air.  This is what creates buoyancy.  Because of gravity acting on the fluid the pressure increases with depth.  Since the pressure of the fluid will act on all points of all sides of the buoy at right angle to it's surface than you have an equal force acting on all sides.  Now add to that the increase in pressure with depth and this will actually give you more pressure acting on the buoy from below than what is acting on it from above.  This doesn't mean that buoyancy increase with depth because as you go down the pressure acting from above increases at the same rate as the bottom.  So the influencing factor when it comes to buoyancy is the size of the buoy.  This of course increase how much fluid is displaced and it just so happens that the force of ascent is equal to that amount of fluid displaced.

So the straight tube is not the same as the design I have suggested because the design I suggest provide an area below and above the buoy which will give it lift.  This lift of course would be equal to a buoy the size of 5 inches in diameter assuming we are working with an eight inch buoy in a tube whose narrowest point is 3 inches in diameter.  Now that I think about it, this may not be the case.  Since the tube is flexible than the pressure acting on the wall of this flexible tube would get transferred through the fluid in these gaps and will then meet up with the shell of the buoy inside the tube.  The pressure would get transferred undiminished as the laws of hydraulics dictate.  So really the diameter of the buoy, as far as buoyancy is concerned, will be eight inches minus the total area the thickness of the sleeve covers.  I estimate around one inch so the buoyant diameter of the buoy will be seven inches.  It's still not eight but it's better than 5.

#### The Naked Scientists Forum

##### Re: Perpetual motion Device...
« Reply #74 on: 29/06/2006 23:09:04 »

Login
Login with username, password and session length