If you have a shelf with a number of weights sitting on it, then you
can give one of them a horizontal nudge and convert its potential to
physical energy.
Easily harnessed with a bit of string.
Heat is a form of potential energy, and it 'hits the floor' when it
gets to -273c (approx) - we are swimming in 'heat' above absolute zero.
Note that it is not violating conservation of energy.
The Victorians designed tube stations on a ramp - enter a station and
momentum was converted to potential energy, leave it and going down
hill restores the momentum. I believe the Routemaster bus does
something like that using rotors.
Similarly lifts use counterbalances, so the real energy used is just
the 'weight' of the passengers going up - and I think that some early
lifts used water to leech on lifts going down.
There must be something similar to a gyroscope that objects to being
moved in a vertical direction - just as a gyroscope dislikes being
twisted. It could be as simple as a peculial combination of gyroscopes.
What I'm trying to say is that since (perhaps) 1850 our technology has
been using 'brute force' rather than sailing with the Trade Winds.
Probably the next step is to use the Ju Jitzu approach, harness what is
there rather than thumping things into submission.
My experience is that most solutions are so simple that most people
miss them.
- I think I'm missing something
In all the energy conversion techniques there is always hanging over
the dreaded second law of thermodynamics. Not that there is a proof for
it but 100% empiricism is a hard hand to beat. You can also blame Mr
Carnot. Gyroscopes, mmmm. Actually quite simple but as misunderstood as
the most misunderstood thing that was ever misunderstood. Here's an
interesting thing; if you fix a gyro onto a rigid base and restrict its
tilt to one plane only, it can be pushed over like it wasn't
spinning. Point being that it has to be allowed to move at right angles
to the force for the gyro effect to occur. If it's big enough in a
ship, it does stabilise things even though rigidly fixed in plane, but
the ship can move.
On the other hand, I too hold onto the notion that there has to be an
easier way. As I've discussed before, it takes no energy for A to get
to B in terms of the system energy at the beginning and end state. Use
gravity to power a train down a U shaped vacuum tube, mega bungee
chord, compressed air etc. All are energy recoverable systems. Must get
round to emailing my notion on fusion power but there are loads of
links on the basic technique of electrostatically energised nuclei if
you have a gander. Ten million degrees centigrade equates to only a few
thousand electron volts! My wheeze is not to lose 99.999999% of the
energy.
Best
What narks me is that it is easy to leach off a source of heat, just
dig a deep enough hole, drop water down it and you'll get steam back.
Yet our ambient temperature is actually quite hot....
On another track, the Israelis were looking into building huge towers,
putting sea water in the bottom, generating (starting) an updraught and
generating rain clouds. Since water vapour is substantially lighter
than nitrogen, the process, once started might actually generate
energy.
That fusion wheeze sounds interesting.
Again, absolute temperature is quite appealing but one can only utilise
energy directly if there is a potential differential. One *can* split
higher energy molecules from lower energy ones to liberate heat (and
cold) but only by the application of energy. Fridges work like that.
Also the reason why heat pumps cannot be self sustaining, second low of
thermodynamics. The peltier effect, sometimes utilised for local
cooling of semiconductors, does a similar job. Essentially
thermocouples in reverse. Ever come across vortex tubes? They directly
separate higher speed molecules from lower. A few applications but very
inefficient.
Nevertheless, even with the constraints imposed by damned physics,
there is a muckle amount of energy out there pleading to be harnessed
by techniques such as those you have mentioned. The only impediment is
incentive, and that won't change whilst the oil keeps flowing and we
remain complacent and complicitly ignorant.
Best
Best
I agree, Drew, while there is no incentive we will just carry on
regardless.
Somehow, I suspect, we are looking in the wrong direction
A Zadie view of things is probably required