Remember me
▼ Content

Gravity fed electrical generation system



Page 6 of 11<<<45678>>>
02-05-2019 22:43
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
dehammer wrote:
I do believe this guy is Bill Nye, the science fraud guy.

Why? You deny the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics, just like Bill Nye does.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
02-05-2019 22:53
dehammer
★★★☆☆
(431)
You have no clue what those are, just as Bill Nye doesn't have a clue when the ice age ended (hint, it hasn't).
02-05-2019 23:58
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
dehammer wrote:
You have no clue what those are, just as Bill Nye doesn't have a clue when the ice age ended (hint, it hasn't).


You consider the current ice cap size as an 'ice age'??

You should visit eastern Washington sometime so you can see the weird terrain left behind by a vast glacier.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
03-05-2019 00:08
dehammer
★★★☆☆
(431)
No, the ice age is when the temperature falls to a certain level. That is considerably hotter than its been in several million years. We are no where near that point.
In terms of the long history of the Earth we are actually still in an overarching ice age period - known as the Quaternary glaciation - which has been going for the last 2.6 million years. At the moment, the Earth is just in a slightly warmer period, an interglacial.

The ice age consist of two parts, the glaciation and the interglacial period. We are in the interglacial period.
03-05-2019 01:11
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
dehammer wrote:
I do believe this guy is Bill Nye, the science fraud guy.


I watched a program with him and a real scientist just last night. When Bill Nye had no facts on his side he simply tried to shout the guy down.

He was a mechanical engineer. That doesn't mean he couldn't study the facts and come to a conclusion but he plainly studied nothing. He is doing nothing more than parroting NASA garbage.

And the reason that the Democrats are trying to poison the well is because AG Barr is going to prosecute all of the NASA "scientists" who have counterfeited the temperature records.

Another blow to the Deep State - the bureaucracy that has been really running this country since the end of WW II.
03-05-2019 01:17
dehammer
★★★☆☆
(431)
Wake wrote:When Bill Nye had no facts on his side he simply tried to shout the guy down.
Sounds familiar!... Hummm I wonder which nightmare on this forum sounds like that.

I really do hope Barr goes after those science frauds.
03-05-2019 01:27
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
dehammer wrote:
Wake wrote:When Bill Nye had no facts on his side he simply tried to shout the guy down.
Sounds familiar!... Hummm I wonder which nightmare on this forum sounds like that.

I really do hope Barr goes after those science frauds.


Believe it or not, Nightmare started out rather conservative. But when it turned out that I caught him in mistakes all over the place he went completely nuts and has become little more than a naysayer of almost everything. The only reason he would agree with me is to disagree with someone else that is on his nerves.

When he was conservative I merely tried to correct his most blatant errors. The Climate is an EXTREMELY complex systems. But you can describe it in fairly simple terms.

Take for instance Nightmare continuously claiming that you cannot heat the air. Rather the concept he will argue the details trying to make himself look better. There are many people here who do not understand the difference between energy and heat and there is no need for them to do so.

I am presently working on a paper that is combining the atmospheric density with the solar constant on that planet to either the surface temperature or that at 1 bar in the case of the outer planets which are all gas giants. This will now trigger Nightmare to tell us that Neptune has a solid surface far below 1 bar. After all, he's been there and he knows. And I have to agree that he comes from another planet.
03-05-2019 01:30
dehammer
★★★☆☆
(431)
darn it didn't let me put in a thumbs up.
Edited on 03-05-2019 01:31
03-05-2019 03:23
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
dehammer wrote:
No, the ice age is when the temperature falls to a certain level. That is considerably hotter than its been in several million years. We are no where near that point.
In terms of the long history of the Earth we are actually still in an overarching ice age period - known as the Quaternary glaciation - which has been going for the last 2.6 million years. At the moment, the Earth is just in a slightly warmer period, an interglacial.

The ice age consist of two parts, the glaciation and the interglacial period. We are in the interglacial period.


Okay, so you denied your own argument on this topic as well. Done here.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
03-05-2019 03:25
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
Wake wrote:
dehammer wrote:
I do believe this guy is Bill Nye, the science fraud guy.


I watched a program with him and a real scientist just last night. When Bill Nye had no facts on his side he simply tried to shout the guy down.

He was a mechanical engineer. That doesn't mean he couldn't study the facts and come to a conclusion but he plainly studied nothing. He is doing nothing more than parroting NASA garbage.

And the reason that the Democrats are trying to poison the well is because AG Barr is going to prosecute all of the NASA "scientists" who have counterfeited the temperature records.

Another blow to the Deep State - the bureaucracy that has been really running this country since the end of WW II.


You think he will, eh? He didn't mention anything like that. He DID mention that he was going to investigate the people involved in the feeding the Mueller probe with 'evidence'.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
03-05-2019 03:33
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
Wake wrote:
dehammer wrote:
Wake wrote:When Bill Nye had no facts on his side he simply tried to shout the guy down.
Sounds familiar!... Hummm I wonder which nightmare on this forum sounds like that.

I really do hope Barr goes after those science frauds.


Believe it or not, Nightmare started out rather conservative. But when it turned out that I caught him in mistakes all over the place he went completely nuts and has become little more than a naysayer of almost everything. The only reason he would agree with me is to disagree with someone else that is on his nerves.

Still very conservative. Nothing's changed.
Wake wrote:
When he was conservative I merely tried to correct his most blatant errors.

Still am. I am not making errors. YOU are.
Wake wrote:
The Climate is an EXTREMELY complex systems. But you can describe it in fairly simple terms.

Neither a conservative nor liberal question. Climate is not a system at all.
Wake wrote:
Take for instance Nightmare continuously claiming that you cannot heat the air.

You can. I never said otherwise.
Wake wrote:
Rather the concept he will argue the details trying to make himself look better.

No, you are making shit up.
Wake wrote:
There are many people here who do not understand the difference between energy and heat and there is no need for them to do so.

You, dehammer, and James do not understand the difference between energy and heat.

You should. You just make yourselves look like idiots talking about heat as if it were energy, or that it is contained in anything, or that you can slow or trap it.
Wake wrote:
I am presently working on a paper that is combining the atmospheric density with the solar constant on that planet to either the surface temperature or that at 1 bar in the case of the outer planets which are all gas giants.

Off topic, and I don't believe you.
Wake wrote:
This will now trigger Nightmare to tell us that Neptune has a solid surface far below 1 bar.

Nonsensical statement. I would never make any such statement.
Wake wrote:
After all, he's been there and he knows.

Our probes have. I happen to believe the data they sent back to us.
Wake wrote:
And I have to agree that he comes from another planet.

Nope. I'm native American, born right here on planet Earth.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
03-05-2019 03:48
dehammer
★★★☆☆
(431)
Your right wake. He's totally around the bend.

Would you be able to check my math?
03-05-2019 05:16
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
dehammer wrote:
Your right wake. He's totally around the bend.

Would you be able to check my math?


He doesn't know how.

I have already checked your math and showed you what is wrong with it.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
03-05-2019 05:18
dehammer
★★★☆☆
(431)
No, you said it was, but never proved it. I could claim that you were intelligent but proving it would be really difficult.
03-05-2019 05:24
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
dehammer wrote:
No, you said it was, but never proved it.

So you deny mathematics as well. Everything I used in the math has already been proven. Mathematics is a closed functinoal system. It has proofs, and with it, the power of prediction.
dehammer wrote:
I could claim that you were intelligent but proving it would be really difficult.

Since 'intelligence' is a comparative term, it's easy to prove it. Perhaps you don't know what a comparative term is. It's a type of binomial operator, defined by axioms in mathematics.

But you deny mathematics.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
03-05-2019 07:09
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
dehammer wrote:
Your right wake. He's totally around the bend.

Would you be able to check my math?


I do not need to check your math. Let me explain this in simple terms - water and the gaseous components of it weight exactly the same. So whether it is in gaseous form or liquid you have to expend energy to get it to the top of your spire - 10,000 ft.

Breaking the water down into its gaseous components is nothing more than throwing away energy.

When you drop it you cannot have individual steps on the way down because the energy is dependent upon mass x velocity square. If you take smaller steps on the way down you lose most of the energy from the gravity well.

So consider - you propose to lift water up and drop it. Lifting it is not 100% efficient and dropping it in a pure vacuum to avoid aerodynamic drag also has its problems. After a certain velocity the liquid will spread out from the internal friction of the water itself this means that energy is lost due to this spreading. As it spreads it must sooner or later touch the sides of the tube. This then causes friction and heating which generates steam and gas through which the liquid must pass again losing energy via aerodynamic drag through a gaseous phase that falls slower due to the friction slowing of the sides of the tube.

In short, you lose energy on the lifting of the matter. You lose energy from dropping the matter. Converting the liquid to a gas makes absolutely no change in the mechanism and wastes additional energy.

In short there is no such thing as a Gravity Harvester.
03-05-2019 11:16
dehammer
★★★☆☆
(431)
watch this vidoe THEN tell me that gases are just as heavy as water. Tell me that they do not go to the top of a pipe.

Specifically look at 1:40 to 1:43 and tell me that water is the same weight as the gas.

It doesn't matter how much it weighs. The gas will ALWAYS go above the water and if you keep adding water at the bottom, the gas will have to go up to the top of the pipe. Eventually no matter how long it takes if you keep adding water to keep the bottom of the pipe covered, the gas will be forced up the pipe to the top.

As to the pipes being filled with just the hydrogen and the oxygen, there is two ways to do it. You can have a pump at the top that evacuates the air. This will pull the water up, until it fills the pipe.

Or the simplest is to have a ball the perfect size as your pipe, that weighs less than water, such as a ping pong ball. As the hydrogen and oxygen is released from beneath the ball, it pushes the ball up, preventing mixing of air and the gas. When the ball reaches the top, you have a value just below the top so that the ball will go up a little bit more and then close the valve. Then you can unscrew the extra bit and screw the valve into the motor or fuel cell.

IF you are using flex hose, there is another way. Have a length that you can handle, such as 50 foot coiled in a barrel. Seal the top with something that has a specific burst pressure, and make sure you do not over pump that pressure. Screw a cap over it for transportation, then fill the pipe from the bottom with the gas. Before removing the bottom from the water, after it is filled, put another seal on it and cap it for transportation.

When it gets to the position, you take the cap off the lower one and the cap off the top and screw them together. When they are all connected, you add enough pressure at the bottom to rupture the seals and one by one they will burst. The gas will then flow.

The only way I can see you not seeing this is if you think that the system would only release a tiny amount of gas at a time. It isn't. I keep telling you that you electrolysis enough water in the beginning to completely fill the hoses. THAT will take a lot of water, but once it is filled you add the same amount at the bottom as you take out at the top.
Edited on 03-05-2019 11:44
03-05-2019 11:25
HarveyH55
★★★★★
(2396)
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
dehammer wrote:
I do believe this guy is Bill Nye, the science fraud guy.


I watched a program with him and a real scientist just last night. When Bill Nye had no facts on his side he simply tried to shout the guy down.

He was a mechanical engineer. That doesn't mean he couldn't study the facts and come to a conclusion but he plainly studied nothing. He is doing nothing more than parroting NASA garbage.

And the reason that the Democrats are trying to poison the well is because AG Barr is going to prosecute all of the NASA "scientists" who have counterfeited the temperature records.

Another blow to the Deep State - the bureaucracy that has been really running this country since the end of WW II.


You think he will, eh? He didn't mention anything like that. He DID mention that he was going to investigate the people involved in the feeding the Mueller probe with 'evidence'.


It's not just the 'evidence' that got the investigation started, but also all the media leaks during the Obama administration, and beginning of Trump's, which pushed what little there was. Those leaks were deliberate, with the intent to keep the focus on the investigation. They've never actual shown proof that the Russian government was actually behind any of the Email hacking, or influencing the election. Really don't see the benefit for the Russian government, our President doesn't have a whole lot of power. Most things need Congressional approval, and everything else can be challenged, delayed, or overridden. Very little benefit, for the work and the risk. The Email Phishing is a common attack of thieves, could have been russian, just not a government operation. Might have only been routed through russian servers, could have been anyone, anywhere.

Personally. I believe it was a smoke screen, while the world is focused on russia, and Trump, there were some sneaky things going on. Hilary needed to escape her Email problems. It was just her handling them, the private server, but why the interest in them in the first place. Four Americans died horribly in Libya, and Hillary didn't seem to respond to requests for better, and additional security. We help over through their government only a couple years before, obviously not everyone appreciated it. Obama added over $10 trillion to the national debt, with little to show for it. My guess is there are a lot of elected officials with sticky fingers, who did quite well during the Obama years. Seems sufficient for a financials probe. The democrats want to see everything Trump, think some of the congress should get the same, which is probably the key point of keeping Trump in the spotlight, and running. Most couldn't stand up to a very close look at there private side business dealings. But, who is going to investigate, the investigators, or police, the police?
03-05-2019 11:46
dehammer
★★★☆☆
(431)
Can we discuss trump on another thread?
03-05-2019 19:08
HarveyH55
★★★★★
(2396)
Trump is a builder, and to placate the 'Greener' voters, he might be inclined to build some alternative energy systems. He's not a Climatology fan, or solar/wind guy either. Now, if you could some how incorperate your idea into a border wall...
03-05-2019 19:33
dehammer
★★★☆☆
(431)
He's more likely to have Barr look into the criminal act of certain government officials who block information about the climate change. The traitor Obama did not force these officials to prove their statements, and when Congress tried to subpoena them, they said their computers crashed, all at the same time. Obama let them get away with it. Trump is likely to kick them out of office if they refuse to give the data.
03-05-2019 20:00
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
dehammer wrote:
watch this vidoe THEN tell me that gases are just as heavy as water. Tell me that they do not go to the top of a pipe.
A test tube is not a 750 foot pipe.
dehammer wrote:
Specifically look at 1:40 to 1:43 and tell me that water is the same weight as the gas.
It is. Wake is right on that one.
dehammer wrote:
It doesn't matter how much it weighs.
Yes it does.
dehammer wrote:
The gas will ALWAYS go above the water and if you keep adding water at the bottom, the gas will have to go up to the top of the pipe.
So you are going to need to pump water up a 750 foot pipe. That's going to require enormous energy, due to the weight.
dehammer wrote:
Eventually no matter how long it takes if you keep adding water to keep the bottom of the pipe covered, the gas will be forced up the pipe to the top.
Only to a certain point.
dehammer wrote:
As to the pipes being filled with just the hydrogen and the oxygen, there is two ways to do it. You can have a pump at the top that evacuates the air. This will pull the water up, until it fills the pipe.

No, you cannot lift the water any higher than about 34 feet with such a pump.
dehammer wrote:
Or the simplest is to have a ball the perfect size as your pipe, that weighs less than water, such as a ping pong ball. As the hydrogen and oxygen is released from beneath the ball, it pushes the ball up, preventing mixing of air and the gas. When the ball reaches the top, you have a value just below the top so that the ball will go up a little bit more and then close the valve. Then you can unscrew the extra bit and screw the valve into the motor or fuel cell.
A ball only adds resistance to the flow, making it harder to pump.
dehammer wrote:
IF you are using flex hose, there is another way. Have a length that you can handle, such as 50 foot coiled in a barrel. Seal the top with something that has a specific burst pressure, and make sure you do not over pump that pressure. Screw a cap over it for transportation, then fill the pipe from the bottom with the gas. Before removing the bottom from the water, after it is filled, put another seal on it and cap it for transportation.
So you are going to transport a hose full of water to 750 feet? That requires energy dude. Where is that energy coming from?
dehammer wrote:
When it gets to the position, you take the cap off the lower one and the cap off the top and screw them together. When they are all connected, you add enough pressure at the bottom to rupture the seals and one by one they will burst. The gas will then flow.
But you just spent a tremendous amount of energy to do that.
dehammer wrote:
The only way I can see you not seeing this is if you think that the system would only release a tiny amount of gas at a time. It isn't. I keep telling you that you electrolysis enough water in the beginning to completely fill the hoses. THAT will take a lot of water, but once it is filled you add the same amount at the bottom as you take out at the top.

No, it won't. Wake is right on this one. The hoses will not fill. No amount of pumping will change that.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
03-05-2019 20:01
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
HarveyH55 wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
Wake wrote:
dehammer wrote:
I do believe this guy is Bill Nye, the science fraud guy.


I watched a program with him and a real scientist just last night. When Bill Nye had no facts on his side he simply tried to shout the guy down.

He was a mechanical engineer. That doesn't mean he couldn't study the facts and come to a conclusion but he plainly studied nothing. He is doing nothing more than parroting NASA garbage.

And the reason that the Democrats are trying to poison the well is because AG Barr is going to prosecute all of the NASA "scientists" who have counterfeited the temperature records.

Another blow to the Deep State - the bureaucracy that has been really running this country since the end of WW II.


You think he will, eh? He didn't mention anything like that. He DID mention that he was going to investigate the people involved in the feeding the Mueller probe with 'evidence'.


It's not just the 'evidence' that got the investigation started, but also all the media leaks during the Obama administration, and beginning of Trump's, which pushed what little there was. Those leaks were deliberate, with the intent to keep the focus on the investigation. They've never actual shown proof that the Russian government was actually behind any of the Email hacking, or influencing the election. Really don't see the benefit for the Russian government, our President doesn't have a whole lot of power. Most things need Congressional approval, and everything else can be challenged, delayed, or overridden. Very little benefit, for the work and the risk. The Email Phishing is a common attack of thieves, could have been russian, just not a government operation. Might have only been routed through russian servers, could have been anyone, anywhere.

Personally. I believe it was a smoke screen, while the world is focused on russia, and Trump, there were some sneaky things going on. Hilary needed to escape her Email problems. It was just her handling them, the private server, but why the interest in them in the first place. Four Americans died horribly in Libya, and Hillary didn't seem to respond to requests for better, and additional security. We help over through their government only a couple years before, obviously not everyone appreciated it. Obama added over $10 trillion to the national debt, with little to show for it. My guess is there are a lot of elected officials with sticky fingers, who did quite well during the Obama years. Seems sufficient for a financials probe. The democrats want to see everything Trump, think some of the congress should get the same, which is probably the key point of keeping Trump in the spotlight, and running. Most couldn't stand up to a very close look at there private side business dealings. But, who is going to investigate, the investigators, or police, the police?


It will be interesting to see where this goes, that's for sure! Already the rats are running for cover.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
03-05-2019 20:01
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
dehammer wrote:
Can we discuss trump on another thread?

No.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
03-05-2019 20:24
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★☆
(1783)
Into the Night wrote:
dehammer wrote:
Can we discuss trump on another thread?

No.

Possibly the best post of this entire thread!!
LAMO!
03-05-2019 20:44
dehammer
★★★☆☆
(431)
Into the Night wrote:A test tube is not a 750 foot pipe.
They are both enclosed containers. IF there is no gas in them, they will pull the water to the top. Once you start to electrolysis them, the gas will go to the top and the water to the bottom. THAT is proven science.

It is. Wake is right on that one.
So your saying there is no gas at the top of the tube?

Yes it does.
Not in this case. What is important is the density.

So you are going to need to pump water up a 750 foot pipe. That's going to require enormous energy, due to the weight.
It would have to be done once unless you did it with hydrogen in the first place. But then again I gave other options.

Only to a certain point.
So your saying there is no gas 100 miles above the earth? Scientist say there is an atmosphere to 300 miles, but you set here and say you know better than all those ph.d scientist.


No, you cannot lift the water any higher than about 34 feet with such a pump.
Then you have a vacuum above it that point. You cant have it both ways. Either your going to have water going up that far or you are going to have a vacuum. Either works when you are trying to get rid of any stray atmosphere in the pipe.

A ball only adds resistance to the flow, making it harder to pump.
It is the way they do it with other gases, so why would it not work here?

So you are going to transport a hose full of water to 750 feet? That requires energy dude. Where is that energy coming from?
I don't know, maybe mule power? There are so many ways it can be done. Perhaps we will put some helium balloons on a rope and use them to balance the weight then walk it up.


But you just spent a tremendous amount of energy to do that.


Yes, and its called construction of the system. Its expected to take energy.

No, it won't. Wake is right on this one. The hoses will not fill. No amount of pumping will change that.
And your proof? Science backs me up, and I have given it to you. You keep your head in the sand, with your fingers in your ear and say "na na na, cant hear you". That is not proof.
03-05-2019 21:37
Wake
★★★★★
(4031)
dehammer wrote:
He's more likely to have Barr look into the criminal act of certain government officials who block information about the climate change. The traitor Obama did not force these officials to prove their statements, and when Congress tried to subpoena them, they said their computers crashed, all at the same time. Obama let them get away with it. Trump is likely to kick them out of office if they refuse to give the data.


Tell us how large this tube is that you're thinking of making 10,000 feet high. What do you suppose the weight of a column of water that high and whatever the displacement of the tube is?

Rather than throw numbers around as if you had an idea of what they mean explain this Gravity Harvester as you see it.

The gases that make up water are about a little less that half the density of the water from which they are comprised so about one cubic meter of water will make up about 2 1/4 cubic meters of O and H.

To raise this to whatever level you wish you HAVE to raise the water in these tubes. If you have a 10,000 meters high tube that is one sq meter in diameter. This is 1,000 KG x 10,000 or 10 million kg. Since you would only be raising it an average height of 5,000 meters this would be, what, 500 billion joules?

So you suppose that doing TWO of those tubes - or expending 1 trillion joules isn't doing any work? Now you must electrolyze the water and that gas must rise in the tubes. It is displacing 10 million kg of water. and hence the gas is compressed to an unusable volume. In order to be usable you have to electrolyze a very large quantity. Now at the tops of these tubes you have EXTREMELY high pressure gas.

The speed of reconversion to water is extremely fast - you must burn the two together. You must then allow this water to fall the entire distance to the ground to get back the power you put into it to raise the gases to that altitude.

There is NO FREE RIDE.
03-05-2019 22:23
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
dehammer wrote:
Into the Night wrote:A test tube is not a 750 foot pipe.
They are both enclosed containers. IF there is no gas in them, they will pull the water to the top. Once you start to electrolysis them, the gas will go to the top and the water to the bottom. THAT is proven science.

Science has no proofs. Science is an open functional system. Science is just a set of falsifiable theories, many of which you happen to have denied so far.
dehammer wrote:
It is. Wake is right on that one.
So your saying there is no gas at the top of the tube?

Right.
dehammer wrote:
Yes it does.
Not in this case. What is important is the density.

No. What is important is the weight of a gas in a sealed tube.
dehammer wrote:
So you are going to need to pump water up a 750 foot pipe. That's going to require enormous energy, due to the weight.
It would have to be done once unless you did it with hydrogen in the first place. But then again I gave other options.

Wait...whut? You are going to use electrolysis to create the gases, and NOT use it to power your machine???

dehammer wrote:
Only to a certain point.
So your saying there is no gas 100 miles above the earth? Scientist say there is an atmosphere to 300 miles, but you set here and say you know better than all those ph.d scientist.

I don't.They will tell you the same thing I am.
dehammer wrote:
No, you cannot lift the water any higher than about 34 feet with such a pump.
Then you have a vacuum above it that point.

Yup.
dehammer wrote:
You cant have it both ways.

Try English. It works better.
dehammer wrote:
Either your going to have water going up that far or you are going to have a vacuum.

You will have a vacuum.
dehammer wrote:
Either works when you are trying to get rid of any stray atmosphere in the pipe.

You have to use a pump to generate that vacuum, dude. That requires energy.
dehammer wrote:
A ball only adds resistance to the flow, making it harder to pump.
It is the way they do it with other gases, so why would it not work here?

Because you are only adding resistance to the flow. Now you tell me the fuel cell will run WITHOUT anything generating the hydrogen and oxygen!

dehammer wrote:
So you are going to transport a hose full of water to 750 feet? That requires energy dude. Where is that energy coming from?
I don't know, maybe mule power? There are so many ways it can be done. Perhaps we will put some helium balloons on a rope and use them to balance the weight then walk it up.

The balloon won't rise. Walking requires energy. So does a mule.
dehammer wrote:
But you just spent a tremendous amount of energy to do that.


Yes, and its called construction of the system. Its expected to take energy.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! You expect your electrolysis cell to convert a fixed amount of water into hydrogen and oxygen and use THAT, and THAT ALONE to power your machine forever???

dehammer wrote:
No, it won't. Wake is right on this one. The hoses will not fill. No amount of pumping will change that.
And your proof?

Fluid dynamics.
dehammer wrote:
Science backs me up, and I have given it to you.

No, you are denying science. You are denying fluid dynamics at the moment.
dehammer wrote:
You keep your head in the sand, with your fingers in your ear and say "na na na, cant hear you".

Inversion fallacy.
dehammer wrote:
That is not proof.

Science has no proofs.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
Edited on 03-05-2019 22:26
03-05-2019 23:29
dehammer
★★★☆☆
(431)
Wake wrote:Rather than throw numbers around as if you had an idea of what they mean explain this Gravity Harvester as you see it.


I do not believe that anyone would simply build a 10000 foot system but would rather build it in stages. That way, it would start making money long before it was finish and could actually pay itself off by the time its done.

There is actually two version of it (the 10000 foot system). One is where the water would return to the original side and the other that it would be used to water the opposite side, such as where a desert existed because of the mountain range. In both cases, I would start the same. The only difference is that in building the second case, a second set of pipes would be laid beside the first to carry more hydrogen and oxygen.

Here is how I would build it. IF someone was paying for the 10000 foot system, it would obviously already be proven. This meant a smaller system would have been built and people would have put up the money, expecting to get repaid at some point.

First I would need some outside electricity to start it. IF I was building in from the sea, I would start by putting the electrolysis machine in about 30 foot of water. In the early test it would have been determined how high it had to be to make the power back. Lets go with what was listed on the graph that was on the patent and say it is 600 foot.

IF this is the case, I would get 41 20 foot long by 24 inch pipe. Each would be sealed at the top. The reason for 41 is that you usually have 6 inches of one pipe going into the end meaning you lose that much. 41 would take it to 800 foot.

Lets say this is going to be done by cheapskates. Lets say there was no electricity around. First thing I would do is make a charging line. This would be a small system with one intent: produce the hydrogen and oxygen needed to get the first 800 foot main line.

Remember, I have no electricity and only have the power of my own legs to build the first system. I do have a bunch of balloons, enough that when filled with hydrogen it can lift 100 lbs. I weight considerable more so if I hold the balloons, I can pull them down.

First thing I would lay a 1/2 inch water pipe 100 foot, from a small tank to a small turbine. Then I would use the balloon to lift 100 lbs of water, thus making them basically weightless. I could carry the buckets to the tank and fill it. As it ran down that pipe it would run a small electrolysis device.

Remember this is all being down by cheapskates, so no extra frills.

As the electrolysis was being done, the gas would be collected in two tubing (hydrogen would be able to carry 2x the volume of the oxygen). Each segment of tubing would be about 50 foot. There would be at least 32 segments, 16 for hydrogen and 16 for oxygen. (note, what is important is the drop, but without knowing the exact slope, its impossible to say how many would actually be needed)

There would be a pressure tank for each gas at the bottom to keep the pressure at the top at the right level but initially it would not be needed.

As needed I would run more water up to the tank. Eventually each of the 50 foot segments would be filled. I would use the balloons to help carry the weight of the segments up the mountain and lay them out. Each segment with the right gas would be screwed together before the seal was opened. When it reached the 800 foot altitude, it would be put into the motor/fuel cell/steam turbine.

I would run a pipe back down for the water. Every 200 foot it would hit a turbine/tank combination. Because my backers are such cheapskates, I would use the balloon to fill each of the tanks with water.

Once each segment was filled, I would open the valves at the turbine to let the water run and it would begin electrolysis the water. The motor/fuel cell/steam generator would also be started to continue to put water into the top.

Because this is 1/3rd more than the break even point, it would produce extra hydrogen and oxygen. This extra hydrogen and oxygen would be used to fuel.

Since I have time but not the money, I would buy 20 foot 2 inch pipes. I would run this up to the 800 foot mark, but after it was up and running and producing extra hydrogen, I would get 200 foot more and run it to 1000 foot. I would move the motor/fuel cell/steam turbine to the top AFTER the pipe was laid. Then I would go to 1200 foot. Each time it would be another turbine and would create more power. At some point I would start selling off some of the electricity to pay for more pipe. Each time I would get 200 foot and another turbine/tank. Each one would produce more power.

At some point, I would decide I had it high enough and would go back to the bottom and put in 800 foot of 6 inch pipe. Then another 200 foot, and another and another.

At some point I would go back to the bottom and get 1 foot pipe. Likely I would just start at the 1000 foot with this and go upwards.

At this point I would likely put more pipe for the opposite side.

At some point I reach the summit and I have one side with 1 foot pipe selling electricity and most of the system is paid for. I am putting in more hydrogen and oxygen and have twice what I need. So I go to the other side and lay a pipe to the 200 mark and put the turbine. This allows me to get most of the electricity that I need and I can start this side. Initially, I would not need to catch the water and could let it flow while I am laying the next set. This would give me 200 foot and almost have the power back. Then I add a third one and the desert side is getting the water and producing it with the electricity on it own side. I would continue to add 200 foot segments all the way to the bottom increasing the power generated. I am not sure how much a 1 foot pipe could carry, but its more than the desert had before.

IF more water was needed more pipes could be laid.
04-05-2019 00:05
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
dehammer wrote:
Wake wrote:Rather than throw numbers around as if you had an idea of what they mean explain this Gravity Harvester as you see it.


I do not believe that anyone would simply build a 10000 foot system but would rather build it in stages. That way, it would start making money long before it was finish and could actually pay itself off by the time its done.
It won't make any money because you will have no power to sell.
dehammer wrote:
There is actually two version of it (the 10000 foot system). One is where the water would return to the original side and the other that it would be used to water the opposite side, such as where a desert existed because of the mountain range. In both cases, I would start the same. The only difference is that in building the second case, a second set of pipes would be laid beside the first to carry more hydrogen and oxygen.

Creating matter out of nothing again?

dehammer wrote:
Here is how I would build it. IF someone was paying for the 10000 foot system, it would obviously already be proven. This meant a smaller system would have been built and people would have put up the money, expecting to get repaid at some point.

Good luck finding and investor.
dehammer wrote:
First I would need some outside electricity to start it.

Why not just start with packaged hydrogen and oxygen from the local liquifaction plant?
dehammer wrote:
IF I was building in from the sea, I would start by putting the electrolysis machine in about 30 foot of water.
Why underwater?
dehammer wrote:
In the early test it would have been determined how high it had to be to make the power back. Lets go with what was listed on the graph that was on the patent and say it is 600 foot.

You won't get your power back...period.
dehammer wrote:
IF this is the case, I would get 41 20 foot long by 24 inch pipe. Each would be sealed at the top. The reason for 41 is that you usually have 6 inches of one pipe going into the end meaning you lose that much. 41 would take it to 800 foot.
2 ft pipe, eh? Any reason for 2ft diameter pipe?
dehammer wrote:
Lets say this is going to be done by cheapskates. Lets say there was no electricity around. First thing I would do is make a charging line. This would be a small system with one intent: produce the hydrogen and oxygen needed to get the first 800 foot main line.
Once you disconnect your machine from this power source to start it, it will not keep going. Remember the 1st law of thermodynamics, which you deny?
dehammer wrote:
Remember, I have no electricity and only have the power of my own legs to build the first system. I do have a bunch of balloons, enough that when filled with hydrogen it can lift 100 lbs. I weight considerable more so if I hold the balloons, I can pull them down.
You're going to lift hydrogen with hydrogen???

dehammer wrote:
First thing I would lay a 1/2 inch water pipe 100 foot, from a small tank to a small turbine. Then I would use the balloon to lift 100 lbs of water, thus making them basically weightless. I could carry the buckets to the tank and fill it. As it ran down that pipe it would run a small electrolysis device.

Remember this is all being down by cheapskates, so no extra frills.

As the electrolysis was being done, the gas would be collected in two tubing (hydrogen would be able to carry 2x the volume of the oxygen). Each segment of tubing would be about 50 foot. There would be at least 32 segments, 16 for hydrogen and 16 for oxygen. (note, what is important is the drop, but without knowing the exact slope, its impossible to say how many would actually be needed)

There would be a pressure tank for each gas at the bottom to keep the pressure at the top at the right level but initially it would not be needed.

As needed I would run more water up to the tank. Eventually each of the 50 foot segments would be filled. I would use the balloons to help carry the weight of the segments up the mountain and lay them out. Each segment with the right gas would be screwed together before the seal was opened. When it reached the 800 foot altitude, it would be put into the motor/fuel cell/steam turbine.

I would run a pipe back down for the water. Every 200 foot it would hit a turbine/tank combination. Because my backers are such cheapskates, I would use the balloon to fill each of the tanks with water.

Once each segment was filled, I would open the valves at the turbine to let the water run and it would begin electrolysis the water. The motor/fuel cell/steam generator would also be started to continue to put water into the top.

Because this is 1/3rd more than the break even point, it would produce extra hydrogen and oxygen. This extra hydrogen and oxygen would be used to fuel.

You can't create extra hydrogen and oxygen from nothing, dude.
dehammer wrote:
Since I have time but not the money, I would buy 20 foot 2 inch pipes. I would run this up to the 800 foot mark, but after it was up and running and producing extra hydrogen, I would get 200 foot more and run it to 1000 foot. I would move the motor/fuel cell/steam turbine to the top AFTER the pipe was laid. Then I would go to 1200 foot. Each time it would be another turbine and would create more power. At some point I would start selling off some of the electricity to pay for more pipe. Each time I would get 200 foot and another turbine/tank. Each one would produce more power.
You can't create power out of nothing, dude.
dehammer wrote:
At some point, I would decide I had it high enough and would go back to the bottom and put in 800 foot of 6 inch pipe. Then another 200 foot, and another and another.

At some point I would go back to the bottom and get 1 foot pipe. Likely I would just start at the 1000 foot with this and go upwards.

At this point I would likely put more pipe for the opposite side.

At some point I reach the summit and I have one side with 1 foot pipe selling electricity and most of the system is paid for. I am putting in more hydrogen and oxygen and have twice what I need. So I go to the other side and lay a pipe to the 200 mark and put the turbine. This allows me to get most of the electricity that I need and I can start this side. Initially, I would not need to catch the water and could let it flow while I am laying the next set. This would give me 200 foot and almost have the power back. Then I add a third one and the desert side is getting the water and producing it with the electricity on it own side. I would continue to add 200 foot segments all the way to the bottom increasing the power generated. I am not sure how much a 1 foot pipe could carry, but its more than the desert had before.
You can't create matter out of nothing, dude. You need that water for your electrolysis cell, remember?
dehammer wrote:
IF more water was needed more pipes could be laid.

And they're magickally going to fill with water from nowhere, right?



The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
Edited on 04-05-2019 00:11
04-05-2019 00:07
dehammer
★★★☆☆
(431)
And this from a guy that thinks the "law of thermodynamics" bends to his will.
04-05-2019 00:11
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
dehammer wrote:
And this from a guy that thinks the "law of thermodynamics" bends to his will.


Inversion fallacy. It is YOU that thinks this.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
04-05-2019 00:14
dehammer
★★★☆☆
(431)
I don't throw the term out every time something comes up that I don't have the science knowledge to understand.
04-05-2019 02:04
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
dehammer wrote:
I don't throw the term out every time something comes up that I don't have the science knowledge to understand.

Since you don't have the science knowledge to understand why your machine won't work, that's easy for you, isn't it?


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
04-05-2019 02:19
dehammer
★★★☆☆
(431)
Every bit of the science behind each part is proven. The only thing that has not been tried is putting them together
04-05-2019 04:27
James___
★★★★★
(3161)
Just having some fun here. With ITN, 1/1 =2 yet 1 * 1 = 1.
Both are incorrect statements. A cell multiplies. It never divides.
Thus 1 * 1 = 2 or 1 + [1 * 1} = x
After all, if cells divided then the life they allow for would become smaller and smaller each time they 1/2 = 1/2 = 2 = 1/4 = 2 = 1/8, etc. Division. Cellular growth is dependent on cells multiplying and not dividing.
Yet everyone in here will agree that cells divide. They don't because otherwise life would not happen. We know that 2 cells can not become a person because they divide.
04-05-2019 16:41
HarveyH55
★★★★★
(2396)
James___ wrote:
Just having some fun here. With ITN, 1/1 =2 yet 1 * 1 = 1.
Both are incorrect statements. A cell multiplies. It never divides.
Thus 1 * 1 = 2 or 1 + [1 * 1} = x
After all, if cells divided then the life they allow for would become smaller and smaller each time they 1/2 = 1/2 = 2 = 1/4 = 2 = 1/8, etc. Division. Cellular growth is dependent on cells multiplying and not dividing.
Yet everyone in here will agree that cells divide. They don't because otherwise life would not happen. We know that 2 cells can not become a person because they divide.


What? 1/1=1... 1+1=2, least in American math, maybe UK math does it differently, like so many other things.

Cells divide into two equal portions. Each half, after a time, replicates from it's share, a second copy of the material. At which point, it can divide again. You sort of left out the growth part of the process.
04-05-2019 19:02
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
dehammer wrote:
Every bit of the science behind each part is proven. The only thing that has not been tried is putting them together


You still don't get it, do you? Science has no proofs.

Putting them together is where you have to ignore the theories I have spoken of.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
04-05-2019 19:03
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13273)
HarveyH55 wrote:
James___ wrote:
Just having some fun here. With ITN, 1/1 =2 yet 1 * 1 = 1.
Both are incorrect statements. A cell multiplies. It never divides.
Thus 1 * 1 = 2 or 1 + [1 * 1} = x
After all, if cells divided then the life they allow for would become smaller and smaller each time they 1/2 = 1/2 = 2 = 1/4 = 2 = 1/8, etc. Division. Cellular growth is dependent on cells multiplying and not dividing.
Yet everyone in here will agree that cells divide. They don't because otherwise life would not happen. We know that 2 cells can not become a person because they divide.


What? 1/1=1... 1+1=2, least in American math, maybe UK math does it differently, like so many other things.

Cells divide into two equal portions. Each half, after a time, replicates from it's share, a second copy of the material. At which point, it can divide again. You sort of left out the growth part of the process.

Sort of?



The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
04-05-2019 19:15
dehammer
★★★☆☆
(431)
So gravity hasn't been proven?
Page 6 of 11<<<45678>>>





Join the debate Gravity fed electrical generation system:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Gravity because it's a heavy subject022-10-2019 08:44
Removing plastic cards from the system306-07-2019 05:14
Wind, solar, storage and back-up system designer1605-07-2019 05:18
Fed researcher warns climate change could spur financial crisis027-03-2019 15:50
Climate is the Earth's Operating System(OS) and we definitely need to protect it.2423-12-2018 21:46
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact