Steve_American wrote:
This toy is an example of a perpetual motion machine.
The laws of nature say this is impossible.
How so, exactly, if you don't mind -- ?
What *I'm* seeing is two different dynamics at-work -- [1] the water falling, creating vacuum pressure and suction in the tank, and [2] the water being sucked up, against gravity, into the tank from below.
Steve_American wrote:
The level in the plastic tank was going down while I watched. In order for it to work for a long time the water level must not go visibly down. I saw it going down.
Okay, yes, I see the same thing and I acknowledge it. It did look as though the water supply would quickly be depleted.
I'll chalk this up to *optimization* -- or, rather, the *lack* of optimization -- meaning that perhaps a faster rate of *upflow* is required, for the current rate of downflow. This is where parameters / sizings would have to be adjusted, in relation to each other, for the desired result (like a good recipe, for a parallel).
Steve_American wrote:
I studied materials engineering in college in the late 60s. I'm telling the lurkers this machine is a scam.
Your denial, is asking me to ignore 2 things.
. . 1] The law of conservation of energy that says that you can't extract energy with the generator from the down flow of water and still have enough energy left to raise an exactly equal mass of water back up with the suction. Not to mention other friction (etc.) in the system.
Okay, this *isn't* my field, but I don't think that the generator itself has anything to do with the overall hydro dynamic of the model, because the electricity it produces is *externalized* / consumed away from the model, so what we're looking at as being 'active' / integral is the water downflow and the water upflow.
In terms of downflow vs. upflow, physics says that, yes, the suction / vacuum created *should* be able to exactly bring up the same quantity of water that's leaving the tank, given airtightness, causing the vacuum. I don't see any 'friction' as being significant since we're talking about *water* here, a fluid, which is nearly frictionless by composition.
Steve_American wrote:
. . 2] My own eyes that saw the water level going down as the machine ran for just a few seconds of footage. I'm not going to disbelieve my eyes on your say so.
So, ckaihatsu and lurkers, watch the video for yourselves and see what I saw. Your eyes should convince you after you know what to look for.
ckaihatsu, if you continue to assert the truth of this scam, your credibility on all other subjects will be destroyed, in my eyes at least.
.
Okay, thanks for taking the time to go over this stuff.