Big Troubles Brewing For The Theoretical Physics Smart-Set!!!

[agor95]

egregious - Why Thank you :-)

[agor95]

Big Troubles Brewing For The Theoretical Physics Smart-Set!!!

To save loosing to much of my life reading every post on this thread.

What are the hot potatoes and have they been resolved?

Please do not go into quotation hell. A simple list would help.

Then we can start mashing them together.

Then end up with something tasty.

[nicbordeaux]

To cut a long story short, some people are surmising that boiled potatoes are OB and will keel, and being starchy and soft will then vibrate internally or slop around, generating OU electricity via zinc anodes previously inserted.

[agor95]

:-)

Are yes Over Boiled potatoes infused with zinc and copper will kill

However Theoretical Physics is safe from this thread.

I believe the thread was more Bessler Wheel related.

[Furcurequs]

Apparently, boiled potatoes make for better batteries:

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/innovatio ... 180948260/

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/2013111 ... -the-world

I'm having a hard time finding specific numbers for energy output, but they say the output from a boiled potato hooked up the way they've done it is equivalent to about 1/2 a regular AA battery and for the same energy output should be about 1/50th the cost.

Oh, look... I've even found a video demonstrating that the output of a boiled potato exceeds that of a raw one.

...and, would you believe it?!

It seems to have been made by the same guy who hoaxed the V-gate!!

"Potato Battery energy version"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ko_R3PeadG4

I might have to actually do this experiment myself.

LOL. Well between the lot of you, you've certainly made this thread lively. That is what a forum's for, eh. Lively discussions, without coming to blows -unlike those parliaments of people who have the misfortune of not being being born an Englishman. ;-)

So thanks for all your contributions.

I'll start my replies first with the rather interesting digression of the potato battery.

As a boy my natural curiosity led me to break open batteries to see what was inside. What did I find. A gluey mess. And if you break open a parboiled potato what does one find, a gluey mess - but any normal potato gives us a lot more gluey mess than is found in an AA battery.

On the face of it then, if a potato battery works at all I see no reason why a bigger one will not have more capacity than a smaller one. After all bigger Duracell batteries have greater capacities than smaller Duracell batteries don't they.

Isn't the mushy potato simply acting as a electrolyte which allows ions to move more readily that in a raw potato.

That is apparently the explanation for why the boiled potato is better. The boiled mush electrolyte allows for a greater ion flow and thus will give about a 10 times greater electric current flow than with a raw potato cell.

I'm not experienced with potato batteries myself, but from what I can find online, the electric current levels that the potato cells can provide are apparently still rather low even with this improvement.

My new flashlight, for instance, while on its highest output setting draws about 2.1 amps from a single 3.7 nominal volt lithium ion cell. That's close to 8 watts out of the "battery," then. Also, wiith a rating of 2600 mah, my lithium ion cell has a capacity of close to 10 watt-hours.

The capabilities of a potato cell would, of course, depend upon multiple factors including things like the surface area of the electrodes. From numbers I've found online, a raw potato cell has a voltage of about 0.85 v. I've also seen a current given of 0.2 ma, but again that number would depend upon electrode surface area and whatnot.

So, even with the boiling, we are talking a very low power device, and maybe in the range of a few milliwatts per potato cell. The lithium ion cell in my flashlight obviously, then, can provide several thousand times that!

It seems to have been made by the same guy who hoaxed the V-gate!!

This seems to suggest that you think the potato demonstration is a hoax.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0hK1wyrrAU

Hey, we're getting somewhere! I was not being serious but rather teasing you by suggesting this one could be a hoax, too.

Now, if only you could tell when people claiming PM online were teasing you!

I did, btw, look up the specifications on one of those little vibration motors and something like what the fellow in the video used. It does appear that the power a boiled potato cell should be able to provide would be maybe just a bit above the minimum required for such a motor's operation, so the numbers do seem to be in the right ballpark to suggest that his video is probably legit.

I did think it odd that the first demonstration video suggested by youtube showing an example experiment of a boiled potato cell happened to be by the same guy who hoaxed the other video which I had just been researching. Was this simply a coincidence? ...or did that video turn up based upon my prior searches, too, and due to Google algorithms?

If Google's search results are dependent upon past search history, I don't think I like that!

[agor95]

Thank you for the quote of a quote of a quote.

I can agree with the principle; however when was Bessler Wheel ever linked to mushy potatoes?

I can understand,a bit of fun, in the Off-Topic area.

[agor95]

I noticed the thread owner ask for this thread to be final in Sept & Dec 2012.

Then someone started posting on pendulum dynamics.

Why not a new thread instead of ignoring the thread owner's request?

[Furcurequs]

***********************************************************
Thank you for your diligent post. I'd like to make the following points

Is the calculus involved in the third derivative of position with respect to time too much for you?

Probably not,...

In that case you're in a better position than most to understand what I am talking about.

...and yet I don't! Being able to calculate a change in acceleration with respect to time doesn't in itself show inexplicable changes in energy!

For instance: is the rotating cam effectively a rotating pendulum or not?

Well, without considering the spring pressing against the cam, the addition of the cam on the shaft might give you a slightly out-of-balance wheel mechanism that could behave a bit like a pendulum, I suppose, giving a pendulous oscillation when it doesn't have enough kinetic energy to make it through a full rotation. Of course with enough kinetic energy, there would then be a pulsating rotation - a bit like you might have if you tried to spin a pendulum like a wheel.

You seem to have grasped that bit fairly well.

Unlike pcstru of Not the Steorn Forum. When I said that you could tell the Rubber Band Motor was a gravity motor because when you laid it on its side it ceased to work. He said I was an idiot and talking rubbish (typical response for that forum).

Later when he'd thought about it, or experimented perhaps, he grudgingly admitted I was right.

Although the typical rubber band motor relies upon the force of gravity for its operation, it is obviously not being powered by gravity. It is powered by radiant energy and is thus a form of heat engine. As a heat engine, it could be modified to run without relying upon gravity at all.

Although my car engine relies upon the force from valve springs for its operation, it is not considered to be a spring engine. It is a gasoline engine - another type of heat engine. ...where gasoline is the source of the energy which drives it.

Many of us here speak of a hypothetical "gravity motor" as being one which would somehow derive it's energy of operation from gravity itself.

Your use of language in calling a rubber band motor a "gravity motor" is not consistent with that of others. What, then, is the point of your use of those words in that way?

When stationary, will it keel or not?

It probably will.

Ignore bearing friction, we are talking principles.
Yes or no - and if no, why.

Already answered. Probably yes.

There's no "probably" about it. The answer is yes.
Matt 5:37. But let your speech be yea, yea: no, no: and that which is over
and above these, is of evil.
Which means your "probably" is from the devil as a different translation puts it.
And if you don't believe in the devil you'll never understand Bessler.

Actually, after looking again at the mechanism we were discussing, it appears that what we were calling a "cam" - the pin or peg that interacts with the spring - may have a counterbalancing weight opposite it on the shaft of the flywheel mechanism.

So, not only am I not going to say "yea, yea" or "no, no," I'm going to change my "probably yes" to "possibly yes, but maybe no." ...lol

...for that damned devil is in the details, and in details that I don't have enough information about so that I could actually be sure of my answer, and regardless of what either of us might want to believe.

If it's not a fake, and you're libelling of the builder by implication is unjustified, then you are in danger of throwing away a pearl of great price.

If this was such a valuable pearl, why did the fellow broadcast it to a bunch of youtube watching swine?! ;)

I'm glad you used an emoticon there or I might have thought you were a Killary supporter.

If I had just built a device which showed such interesting behaviour I would be intrigued and want to share my experience with others. He's done this via the medium of YouTube. If the device is genuine I think his action is perfectly understandable.

And now I have to break off for my dinner.

If I had just built a device which showed such interesting behavior I would be proud of my engineering skills and would want to proceed to show of those skills by maybe hoaxing the gullible. So, I think his action is perfectly understandable, too. ...lol

I hope you had a fine dinner, Grimer!

[agor95]

@Furcurequs

I just choked on my dinner. I do not read the quote in a quote.

However it is a post that is worth reading.

The counter weight on the cam - good point.

This dominant flywheel is big trouble for theoretical physics.

I will post in the correct topic

[Grimer]

Although the typical rubber band motor relies upon the force of gravity for its operation, it is obviously not being powered by gravity. It is powered by radiant energy and is thus a form of heat engine. As a heat engine, it could be modified to run without relying upon gravity at all.

It's obvious to you because you obviously haven't thought about it in any depth and you haven't bothered to go through the previous posts on this topic. :-)

The reason I call it a gravity mill is to provoke people who think they know it all to contradict me. There is a classic example of this bear trap in my Star Chamber interrogation.

If you had thought about what is going on in the anomalous properties of stretched rubber bands you would realise that there is a oscillating transfer of energy between the the long chain molecules and atoms rotating around those molecules. A simple example of this type of energy transfer is the children's toy known as the whirler.

Now this transfer of energy from atom to molecule is adiabatic. I'm sure you know what that means. :-)

So if you insulate the elastic bands so that no heat is taken in or given out then their oscillation will continue indefinitely and no heat input will be required.

Even if the insulation is slightly imperfect one can envisage a situation where the energy output of the motor as measured on a prony brake is greater than that needed for losses.

In effect the stretched rubber band magnifies oscillations from a scale where the are continuous but below the threshold of perception to a scale where they are plainly visible. Think of the long string of the whirler as a telescope tube magnifying the continuous oscillation of the whirler disc. Think of lycopodium powder spread on a water surface magnifying the motion of the water molecules. Magnificat anima mea, Dominum.

[agor95]

The University of Manchester UK has an open day.

The day I was there they had a rubber band wheel.

The bands were heated on one side.
The rubber contracts when heated.
That cause the rim to be pulled towards the axle on that side.

This allowed overbalance and then the rubber cold and
another sector was being heated.

The process was slow however.

Note. Your publication of the weakness in concrete under compression
had political and economic implications.Therefore it would have to be
cleared before you published. That was not done so your employer
found it prudent to let you go. You do not need a Star Chamber form
the mid-17th century for that reality to happen.

I do not think Theoretical Physics is in danger on this one.

[Grimer]

Which publication are you talking about Agor?

As for getting permission for publication I learnt very early in my career that if one published without permission nothing happened - so I never asked. :-)

And BRS did not "let me go". I served, fully paid, right up to my retirement age.

The document which led to the Star Chamber was an internal document which led to the director, Dr Rex Watson, banning me from writing further internal documents, a ban which I appealed against. That is a long story which I don't intend to go into here - but if you're really interested I'll discuss it as a PM in confidence.

[Grimer]

The best example on the Net of a RBM is this:

http://vid136.photobucket.com/albums/q1 ... ng4dgb.mp4

Most of the others are pretty crap because the builders didn't realise that the bands have to be near their breaking points (somethin Bill Beatty also discovered).

[daanopperman]

Hi Grimer ,

The dominant flywheel , do you think it would turn both way's , if so , it would be a fake .
If there was some gain in one direction , it would only work in that direction , and slow down with vigor in the opposite direction .

The mechanism does not act the same on the cam in both rotating directions , it lifts close to the leaf spring pivot , in one direction , and far from the pivot in the opposed rotation .

To change the lifting position , the leaf spring would have to be on the other side of the wheel , with the direction of rotation changed , but this could be done by simply facing the wheel the other way , and change the rotation , which will give then same end result .

[Grimer]

That's an interesting point, Daan.

It certainly won't work if the pendulum bit is horizontal

As to rotating in the other direction, I'm not sure.

If one sees it a Milkovic pendulum then it probably won't work.
But if one sees it as smoothing the out of balance component and thereby harnessing the precessing derivative then it probably will.

The first thing needed is to get hold of the device and check it is genuine.