Re: Multiplier effect for energy?
- From: "JMA" <jmaREMOVE@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 09:46:32 +0100
"Don Lancaster" <don@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
....
> The futility of bouyancy can be proven by setting a neutral density
> object and moving it SIDEWAYS.
Wrong argument. A neutral density object miss the original
working mechanism, hence that's no valid argument.
> The force will likely be proportional to
> the cube of the velocity or higher.
Wrong again.
The resistance force is equal to the speed square times
the aerodynamic coefficient. The aerodynamic coefficient
could be about 0.3 or less.
> And this force will quickly equal
> nearly all of an equivalent bouyant force at very low velocities.
You miss the basic mechanism to have power.
Power is force times velocity and one must work this
problem at the lowest possible velocity and the maximum
force possible.
> Hence, virtually ALL of the bouyant potential energy does nothing but
> heat water.
The buoyancy potential is based in the Archimedes principle
and Archimedes principle has nothing to do with heat.
Archimedes principle is about force.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Multiplier effect for energy?
- From: Don Lancaster
- Re: Multiplier effect for energy?
- References:
- Multiplier effect for energy?
- From: dancehalldoug
- Re: Multiplier effect for energy?
- From: hhc314
- Re: Multiplier effect for energy?
- From: Don Lancaster
- Re: Multiplier effect for energy?
- From: G. R. L. Cowan
- Re: Multiplier effect for energy?
- From: hhc314
- Re: Multiplier effect for energy?
- From: Don Lancaster
- Multiplier effect for energy?
- Prev by Date: Re: Boron Again for Hydrogen Cells.
- Next by Date: Re: Boron Again for Hydrogen Cells.
- Previous by thread: Re: Multiplier effect for energy?
- Next by thread: Re: Multiplier effect for energy?
- Index(es):