[LB7 (OP)]

I think I don't need buoyancy, just a simple mechanical device, one spring, 4 axes, one motor:


d96.png (57.88 kB . 1129x404 - viewed 4439 times)

The spring don't lost any energy. The bottom don't need any energy to move to the right. The motor gives an energy.

[alancalverd]

Usual response:

1. Build a prototype and show me that it generates more energy than it consumes, no matter how small the difference.

2. Explain how it can be scaled up.

I will fund its commercial development, sell the excess energy, and give you 50% of the profit from running it.

Do not reveal any details to anyone else.

Do not contact me until you have passed step 1.

[LB7 (OP)]

Usual response:

1. Build a prototype and show me that it generates more energy than it consumes, no matter how small the difference.

2. Explain how it can be scaled up.

I will fund its commercial development, sell the excess energy, and give you 50% of the profit from running it.

Do not reveal any details to anyone else.

Do not contact me until you have passed step 1.

I sent to Russia 18 months before to publish, since from 2008. I sent all my ideas, I'm not good in calculations so I just send the ideas (a lot of drawings with a lot of modifications). I don't have money, so I can't patent all my ideas nor build all the devices I have in my head.


Another image of the device:


d98.png (61.36 kB . 1166x394 - viewed 3928 times)

[LB7 (OP)]

Here, the trajectory (red color) of the center of the generator, and the green line is a straight line, so it is possible to use the straight line to cancel the torque from the generator :


der3.png (48.9 kB . 726x404 - viewed 3979 times)

[Bored chemist]

For extra points, show us how this mathematical proof of the impossibility of your idea is wrong.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noether%27s_theorem

[LB7 (OP)]

Bored chemist: there are hypothesis to use Noether's theorem. My device is very simple.

[Bored chemist]

Bored chemist: there are hypothesis to use Noether's theorem. My device is very simple.

Yes, and it simply can't work.

[LB7 (OP)]

Bored chemist: there are hypothesis to use Noether's theorem. My device is very simple.

Yes, and it simply can't work.

Without the green line and cancel the torque of the generator from that green line the sum of energy is 0 because the torque from the generator will go to the black arm, and I lost from the black arm what I won by the generator. With the green line it is easy to cancel a torque, just the torque, I don't touch of the force from the center of the generator (the force from the spring). So what, I need an energy to cancel a torque from a straight line ?

note: the green line is fixed to the ground, I can use it to cancel the torque from the generator

[Bored chemist]

Working out why you are wrong is your job, not mine.
However we know that, in fact, the system you propose won't work, so I'm not going to waste my time looking at it.

[LB7 (OP)]

So, why waste your time to reply ? your logic is very bad.

I can just reduce the torque from the generator not cancel at 100%

[Bored chemist]

So, why waste your time to reply ?

To maintain the quality of the site.
I don't think you understand logic; if you did you wouldn't be claiming to do something that's known to be impossible.

[LB7 (OP)]

Maybe like that:


ik6.png (63.27 kB . 988x527 - viewed 3980 times)


dr55.png (61.52 kB . 799x559 - viewed 3977 times)


s19.png (43.2 kB . 684x353 - viewed 3934 times)

[Bored chemist]

Which bit of "it is impossible" are you not understanding?

[LB7 (OP)]

Bored chemist, you know the history of science/technology ? do you know that scientists said IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO HUMAN TO FLY ? the inventors or/and passionate people (a lot didn't know laws of fluids etc, and how many people called them crazy ?) build plane and helicopter ! Nowadays ? 4 years ago, scientists said IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO GRAVE TRANSISTOR BELOW 5 nm or 7nm I didn't remember, MIT BUILT ONE 1nm (carbon), but IBM done it before not in carbon (engineers) ! scientists want to categorized the world with formulas, inventors want to find the solution, it is not the same. Hey, do you know that scientists said the wheel of water is the best to move in water, hey, imagine a undersea with a wheel of water


rfs6.png (440.88 kB . 764x422 - viewed 3927 times)

And so others examples in the history. So what, you believe that Noether prove it is not possible to create/destroy the energy ? I don't know what's wrong with Noether, and it is not my problem, it is for scientists, I'm looking for solutions. So, you help me for the devices or don't read me, don't reply.

Maybe rewrite Noether:

If device is not smart, then Noether is applied.
If device is smart, then Noether couldn't be applied.

:p


rd9.png (55.91 kB . 846x456 - viewed 3903 times)


se3.png (59.69 kB . 908x494 - viewed 3891 times)

or  :


dsi2.png (47.01 kB . 768x433 - viewed 3894 times)

[Bored chemist]

"Bored chemist, you know the history of science/technology ? do you know that scientists said IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO HUMAN TO FLY ?"
Yes, I do.
And, if there had been a valid mathematical proof that it was impossible for humans to fly, then we wouldn't have aircraft.

Do you see the difference?

[LB7 (OP)]

I see the difference, but Noether proved what ? what is energy ? what is time ? what is space ? what is a force ? hum... how to say the ground is stable without know what is under the ground ?

[LB7 (OP)]

Hey ! no need the blue spheres:


fd63.png (40.32 kB . 791x462 - viewed 3844 times)

I can't use the friction, just use a spring between the disks. The length of the spring is constant because the disks don't rotate. But there are 2 positive torques on the arms. The disks have a BIG mass, and don't rotate at start, like that the spring don't have time to change its length.

[Bored chemist]

I see the difference, but Noether proved what ?

That energy is conserved.
By contrast,you have proved.... nothing.

[LB7 (OP)]

I see the difference, but Noether proved what ?

That energy is conserved.
By contrast,you have proved.... nothing.

I try
my last device #16  doesn't work ? I win the friction

device at final:


623.png (14.66 kB . 362x406 - viewed 3852 times)

If at start the disks don't rotate around themselve, and if they have high mass, the spring don't change its length.
The work on the arm1 + the work on the arm2 = 0
The work on the arm21 and arm11 is positive.

The spring applies a force on 2 disks:


gh9.png (21.9 kB . 418x507 - viewed 3814 times)