This is a thread dedicated to bad engineering, bad science, and popular myths. Here is a classic: Connect an electrical motor to an electrical generator, both mechanically and electrically - the motor turns the generator and the generator powers the motor. Many science- and engineering-minded teenagers have considered this as a perpetual energy source. Start the system in motion by hand and it should run forever. What is wrong with this hypothesis?
Simple answer - I don't know. Long answer - it's an interesting idea. Why it doesn't work I don't know but I'm confident it doesn't work or it would have been done long before now.
2) Put a wind turbine on your car that turns an electrical generator. This provides power to recharge the batteries, esp in an electric vehicle, as you drive down the road. Voilà! Free power, Why does it fail?
I would expect that all global-warming deniers can at least answer these high-school level physics questions.
Your post resurrected a memory from the 70’s, of the Neuman machine that was written about in a few of the pop science supermarket magazines. http://www.phact.org/articles/free/newman.php Lots folks have bilked a lot of people on devices that supposedly create more energy than they consume; non have worked.
There have also been honest but failed efforts. Consider the 100 mpg carburetor that gained popularity in the 70s. To some extent they allegedly did work. They helped to boost gas mileage significantly if done correctly. But they required a fairly large chamber above the engine or heated by the exhaust, in which gasoline vapor was stored in a stoichiometric ratio with air [oxygen]. Any guesses why the 100 mpg carburetor failed?
Race cars have wide tires to get more traction than they would get with narrow tires. Why does this explanation fail?
WTF dude? So know you think no ones knows about the four laws of thermodynamics and perpetual motion ? I read alot of embarrassing OP's in my life..
Now is spelled n o w. Explain the laws of thermodynamics. Saying the "laws of thermodynamics" isn't an explanation.
Why someone is not educated enough to understand the four laws of thermodynamics and perpetual motion? I guess someone has to go back to skool. Do the AGW cult know what camber is in car racing?
Uhm any kid knows your OP violates the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics and no I didnt look it up, its common knowledge to any NASCAR redneck fan.
small scale it can work... large scale to supply society is uneconomical and inefficient due to maintenance/replacement costs... 12 volt gen charges up several different banks of 12 volt batteries connected in series, using 'series/parallel' switches (solenoids) to run an inverter to run a 36 volt motor (uses less amperage = less draw on the bank) that runs the generator while the unused banks keep charging, when the first banks deplete, a 'disconnect' switches to the fresh batteries on the next bank... so on and so on, till the first bank is of sufficient charge to be used again... repeat cycle... infinite loop...
Also what the heck does thermodynamics and perpetual motion have to do with the junk science of AGW? Jesus we dont have the data to support it. Just look at this map, notice anything odd of a planet 4.5 billion years old?
Youre forgetting about regenerative braking Regenerative braking is an energy recovery mechanism that slows a vehicle or object by converting its kinetic energy into a form that can be either used immediately or stored until needed. Wikipedia › wiki › Regenerative_br... Regenerative brake - Wikipedia
So what I get out of this thread some people think others who never went to a four year college is stupid?
