Which is why I've been saying this "beam" idea while interesting is never going to be anything more than that - interesting, no mechanical advantage at all.

I dont like to talk about zero energy projects that defy physics but i dont mind talking about low finite energy projects. There is even work being done to convert the heat from an LED into electrical energy so it can be 'recycled' back to the power system or maybe the LED itself. It does not make the LED 100 percent efficient, but it does raise the efficiency.

 

hi Al,
Surely the 'localised' efficiency can be raised in this way, but what about including the over energy required to produce the inividual component parts required to build the working system.??

E

OT: Did you see the overall Carbon footprint created in producing cooked hamburgers.?

 

hi Al,
Surely the 'localised' efficiency can be raised in this way, but what about including the over energy required to produce the inividual component parts required to build the working system.??

E

OT: Did you see the overall Carbon footprint created in producing cooked hamburgers.?

OH yes some interesting points. I didnt see the hamburger thing yet though i'll heve to look for that.

Usually we dont consider what energy went into making the part because it is a local thing like you said. With the greenhouse effect coming into question these days we may have to think about that too in the future.

Now let's see, if 10 units of energy went into the making of the thermal-to-electrical energy sensor and it ran for 1 year with the sensor it could conceivably save 100 units of energy.
These number are purely arbitrary though we'd have to get the real life numbers.
But the point is that i think that if we could save more energy than it took to make the part and then it would reduce the heat escaping into the atmosphere.
It is probably a small amount of energy over say 1 second though, but it may add up over time.
I am thinking probably if we put 1 amp into a device and we got 1ma recycled, then we would really only have to put 0.999 amps into the device. Then it would take a long time to each the break even point.

All the parts being made these days i wonder what they all add up to carbon wise.

 

Since the heat produced in LEDs is caused by inefficiency it makes far more sense to work on improving the efficiency rather than try to add a whole lot of hardware in an effort to recover power from the waste heat. But that whole subject belongs in a different thread, if there is going to be any additional discussion.

And one brief comment about hamburgers: why waste the energy spent by over-cooking them as so many believe is mandatory? (additional tirade removed)

 

I may go on to extract the energy in sone way but other things have come along that need my attention. If we get another lock down who knows

If your measurement of energy extraction is done both properly and honestly, you will never get more out than is put in by your "exciter" motor. By exciter I mean the motor/solenoid or what ever your using to drive the pendulum. Just simple physics at work.

 

Since the heat produced in LEDs is caused by inefficiency it makes far more sense to work on improving the efficiency rather than try to add a whole lot of hardware in an effort to recover power from the waste heat. But that whole subject belongs in a different thread, if there is going to be any additional discussion.

And one brief comment about hamburgers: why waste the energy spent by over-cooking them as so many believe is mandatory? (additional tirade removed)

Well actually that is part of the attempt to raise efficiency.
If you raise the efficiency by 10 percent using other methods, then you apply the thermal recycling idea, you get another 2 percent perhaps. So it is just part of the process of trying to raise efficiency when all other methods have been exhausted.

 

Those who do not agree with what the TS is doing should not interfere with his thread. You don't have to agree that the objective is achieveable to be of some help but constant arguing may result in a ban from the thread.

 

Those who do not agree with what the TS is doing should not interfere with his thread. You don't have to agree that the objective is achieveable to be of some help but constant arguing may result in a ban from the thread.

So the forum standards have changed? Overunity is now allowed?

 

So the forum standards have changed? Overunity is now allowed?

No place has the TS actually mentioned anything close to "over unity". That was a misunderstanding near the start of the thread. It was an investigation about coupled motion systems,

 

So the forum standards have changed? Overunity is now allowed?

Have you read the thread?At no time has the TS suggested this was about overunity. In fact, he has denied posting about overunity many times.

Most specifically in this response ...

What is this obsession with this idea of my trying to get more energy out than I put in? This has come from forum members not me.
I’m well aware of the Laws of Thermodynamics thanks.
If your looking to find somewhere to have a gripe at can I suggest you go and look elsewhere while some interesting and useful discussion continues here?

 

Have you read the thread?At no time has the TS suggested this was about overunity. In fact, he has denied posting about overunity many times.

Most specifically in this response ...

JP, you need to understand that mister bus likes to be critical of some of us. While your investigation was rather theoretical and complex, it was quite clear to many of us that you were investigating something that most of us do not think about. My own examinations of kinematics has been mostly related to machine operation, where it can matter quite a bit. Energy transfer in setups such as your experimental project is a quite different area from what I have investigated.
Those folks looking for free energy systems usually come across as far less educated in kinematics, and other areas.

 

Have you read the thread?At no time has the TS suggested this was about overunity. In fact, he has denied posting about overunity many times.

What person joining the forum wanting to invent over energy ever does? Wanting to generate and store energy from a smaller amount of energy is the most open description of overunity. There is no free lunch, there are losses in every part of every system. His original post was the truest explanation of what he is trying to do.

 

JP, you need to understand that mister bus likes to be critical of some of us

Only those that need it. Sorry to hurt your feelings, but when extraordinary claims are made, they require extraordinary proof.

Those folks looking for free energy systems usually come across as far less educated in kinematics, and other areas.

You mean the ones seeing some one else doing something similar on Yuotube and trying to improve on their failures, because they are "better educated"?

 

Only those that need it. Sorry to hurt your feelings, but when extraordinary claims are made, they require extraordinary proof.



You mean the ones seeing some one else doing something similar on Yuotube and trying to improve on their failures, because they are "better educated"?

It is often funny to de-bunk you-tube stuff. And many of us ARE better educated and DO UNDERSTAND what can not be done. And for this thread discovering the kinematic relationships that lead to the most effective coupling was an interesting exercise. And the whole thing can be a kinetic art item and sell for quite a bit. Profits well over unity! And THAT does work sometimes.