infinite electricity?

alright people.. im in the mood to have my hopes and dreams crushed and i dont know anyone better to do it that you guys (its a compliment i'll explain later).. So anyway.. I was just wondering.. If you were to take a windmill.. and on the tips of each blade put magnets angled off at whatever angle, with all the (we'll just say north) ends facing out. Then put one ring around the blades (similar to the way those protective cages go around fans).. in which you have more magnets angled to repel the blades in a circle due to magnetic repulsion... creating electricity.. and then using what electricity you create to charge the magnets with a quick jolt every few years or so (depending on the magnets and how long it takes them to lose stability).. so that they will constantly remain "charged" while creating excess electricity to use on whatever you might find a need for it. Anyway.. it may not work at all.. but i figured with all you science freaks on here you could tell me why this would/wouldnt work. idk.. it makes sense in my head.

it makes since, direct the magnetic field to assist the wind turbine. wind fields & solar fields spanning the plains could work, farmer subsidies ect. but political childishness delays adults from making any progress. ask Nikola Tesla about the car that drove with no engine

Thermodynamics. You can never extract more energy from a system than you put in. If you use electromagnets then you will always have a net loss of energy. Let's say it requires X amount of electricity to charge the magnets and you are able to generate Y amount of power from the windmill. In addition to power generation you also have a loss of kinetic energy due to friction (in the moving parts, from the air, etc) and a loss of energy due to heat. Because of those losses Y<X so you will always require more power to keep the magnets on than they are capable of generating.

But thats why i was using magnets because they dont actually use energy as they work. they dont work like batteries.. They just repel each other beccause they are opposite poles. and after awhile the electromagnetic field/wall becomes distorted and doesnt repel as effectively. but with tiny bits of charge the poles will align again perfectly until 10 years later when its field is distorted again.

hhmmm, im no scientist... but this reminds me a little bit of what they call magnetism... similar to the alternator in our cars... im sure someone can explain further. but just like derrick i. mentioned above... someone would buy out the copyright and simply discard it... similar to how arco bmp bought out the car that ran on water/hydrogen in order for the world to be reliable on their fuel.. nice thinking though... dont give up on your idea though till someone proves you otherwise.

Electricity should be abundant and FREE. Look up Nikola Tesla.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6wVwYYZqeg I dont know a lot about this but it looks pretty amazing. There is a lot to read about it ;)

Everyone who proposes a Zero Point energy idea is written off as a quack because nobody can make money off it, (Nikola Tesla included) so be glad you're already ready to have your hopes and dreams crushed.

Thermodynamics:

http://www.physicsplanet.com/article...thermodynamics

http://library.thinkquest.org/C00601...ermo2.php3?v=2


Conservation of energy:

http://library.thinkquest.org/2745/data/lawce1.htm


Lent'z Law (conservation of magnetic flux):

http://www.suite101.com/content/unde...nzs-law-a54846


Conservation of charge:

http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~scdiroff...nofCharge.html


...you can't get somethin' for nothin'.

This talks a little bit about Tesla's discovery.

http://educate-yourself.org/fe/radiantenergystory.shtml

Here's a pretty good doc about Tesla's free energy.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...2935002257117#

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jason Hyatt

Thermodynamics. You can never extract more energy from a system than you put in. If you use electromagnets then you will always have a net loss of energy. Let's say it requires X amount of electricity to charge the magnets and you are able to generate Y amount of power from the windmill. In addition to power generation you also have a loss of kinetic energy due to friction (in the moving parts, from the air, etc) and a loss of energy due to heat. Because of those losses Y<X so you will always require more power to keep the magnets on than they are capable of generating.

---

+1

i agree energy cannot be created nor destroyed. But i do feel it can be converted. And magnets seem like the most practical idea in my mind to creating the most efficient way of doing so. Simply because magnets dont actually use energy. if you put a magnet on a desk it will degrade at the same rate as if you were to put it close to another one. So i figure.. seeing as though a magnet (depending on what kind) will have an average span of about 50 years before it loses its magnetic charge.. and if you look at how easy it is to charge a magnet (literally one small shock can realign the magnetic field).. so i figure a windmill spinning for 50 years has to make at LEAST enough electricity to cause a small shock.) And as for the govt saying we can have a 100% efficient machine.. (and i know scientists say the same thing).. but i figure these are also the same people who said the world is flat, and that marijuana is bad for you.. And i figure the world has been doing pretty good at creating energy (look at the whole water cycle and reproduction of plants and animals).. nature itself is a "perpetual motion machine" so to say its impossible.. i dont know.. I dont buy it. But hey.. even if im wrong and it wouldnt work.. I enjoyed my time spent outside of the box :P i like it out there.

and btw im watching the tesla thing now.. and i love it. thanks.. thats why i love you guys. it seems the group of individuals on this website collectively always have infinite insight on any subject posted lol.

I don't get how the windmill would spin... If the magnets are set in a circle at equal distance then they would just each repel one an other with same force... thus going nowhere. But I might be missing your design.

yea ! weed and jiujitsu really opens the mind, Nikola Tesla was a brilliant dude sorrounded by "greedy idiots", but not "stupid idots"
his office was raided by feds when he died, & his research developed in "deep black" government projects. So be pissed every time you pay an electric bill.

YouTube "thunderbolts of the gods", amazing doc on the theory of the electric sun, mind blowing

Do you mean an actual windmill. As in wind-powered generator? We have those.

OK.. im pretty high but im going to try to reword it a different way.. If you take a windmill.. and at the tip of each blade of the windmill you put a magnet angled off (we'll say 45 degrees to the left)... then outside of that is a ring with magnets angled to repel the magnets on the windmill blades. so its a windmill.. only it doesnt need wind to spin. you can keep them inside and use them as little generators or whatever..

and eddie.. im about 5 minutes into it and i already want to thank you for making sure i dont get off the computer for the next hour

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chronic_jiujitsu

OK.. im pretty high but im going to try to reword it a different way.. If you take a windmill.. and at the tip of each blade of the windmill you put a magnet angled off (we'll say 45 degrees to the left)... then outside of that is a ring with magnets angled to repel the magnets on the windmill blades. so its a windmill.. only it doesnt need wind to spin. you can keep them inside and use them as little generators or whatever..

---

I think I know what you mean. You may know some of this already, but here's an explanation of what wouldn't work with the model I think you're suggesting.

Your model seems to suggest that the ring of magnets on the outside will constantly repel the magnets attached to the blades of the windmill. This is true. If you were to have a magnet at 12 (clockface) on the outer ring, and one at 12 on the inner ring they would repel. And this would cause the turbine to rotate (the direction depends on the initial conditions, but let's say clockwise). But, as the same inner magnet approaches 3(clockface) on the outer ring, the outer South magnet at 3 would also repel the inner magnet. It would repel with equal and opposite force as the outer 12 magnet. This would cause the inner magnet to come to rest at the point on it's path that is equally distant from 12 and 3.

In this explanation, I have reported the actions of one inner magnet between two of the outer magnets. I have ignored the fact that you could have many magnets on both the inner and outer parts of the machine. The exact same thing would happen to every magnet on the turbine at the same time, so I didn't complicate the analysis by talking about them all simultaneously.

If I misunderstood your model, let me know what you meant, and I'll analyse that. It's good to see you're thinking about these things.

Sources: Electromagnetics Brown Belt

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matthew Stuart

I think I know what you mean. You may know some of this already, but here's an explanation of what wouldn't work with the model I think you're suggesting.

Your model seems to suggest that the ring of magnets on the outside will constantly repel the magnets attached to the blades of the windmill. This is true. If you were to have a magnet at 12 (clockface) on the outer ring, and one at 12 on the inner ring they would repel. And this would cause the turbine to rotate (the direction depends on the initial conditions, but let's say clockwise). But, as the same inner magnet approaches 3(clockface) on the outer ring, the outer South magnet at 3 would also repel the inner magnet. It would repel with equal and opposite force as the outer 12 magnet. This would cause the inner magnet to come to rest at the point on it's path that is equally distant from 12 and 3.

In this explanation, I have reported the actions of one inner magnet between two of the outer magnets. I have ignored the fact that you could have many magnets on both the inner and outer parts of the machine. The exact same thing would happen to every magnet on the turbine at the same time, so I didn't complicate the analysis by talking about them all simultaneously.

If I misunderstood your model, let me know what you meant, and I'll analyse that. It's good to see you're thinking about these things.

Sources: Electromagnetics Brown Belt

---

This, incidentally, is why I assumed you meant electromagnets. You can pulse electromagnets and using electromagnetic pulse acceleration has already been done, a lot (trains, rollercoasters, aircraft catapults, and even a NASA model for rocket launchers.). The problem with using a pulsed electromagnetic ring to accelerate the "windmill" blades to generate electricity is as described before; you can't get somethin' for nothin' without violating several basic physical laws. Using fixed magnets (e.g. neodymium -- "rare earth" magnets) just results in a ring that won't move at all.

True Jason, pulsed electromagnets means big thermal and inductive losses.

no matthew pretty much nailed it on the head. I get what you're saying abot them getting stuck between each other.. hmm.. well i guess ill just keep thinking it out and try to come up with a way to fix that problem.. maybe something with water to where it is inside constantly moving and shifting weight in a certain way to offset the times that they rest between two magnets. I dont know. it'll give me something to do when im bored. Thanks for taking the time to explain all of this though.