Perpetual Hydro energy loop

Since at system like this can not produce more energy than it consumes

What if I connect one single turbine to some gears the turn MULTIPLE generators at twice, or more, the speed that the turbine is going would i not, with enough generators, produce more then what the pump consumes?

Eddie, the pump is much less than 100% efficient as is the turbine and the generator. Some, less than 50% efficient. At each step you lose energy so where does the extra come from? Wishful thinking?

Eddie, the pump is much less than 100% efficient as is the turbine and the generator. Some, less than 50% efficient. At each step you lose energy so where does the extra come from? Wishful thinking?

Ok, but wouldn't the gears make up for the loss of efficiency? I could get gears to turn the generators who knows how many more times then the turbine
AND multiple generators??? all with the same pumps, heck even add another turbine ...

If you don't like the laws of physics argument, try this: People have been trying to invent perpetual motion machines for hundreds of years - you're not the first to think of it. If it worked, wouldn't everyone have such a setup in their basement and the power companies be out of business?

"In this house, we obey the Laws of Thermodynamics"
Homer J. Simpson

how do hydro electric power plants work? I must be totally wrong in my idea of how they work? Are they connected to the grid and then making electricity? which would be stupid unless they are producing more then they consume?

physics is not really my thing..sorry if i seem irrational

how do hydro electric power plants work? I must be totally wrong in my idea of how they work?

They are plugged into an even larger nuclear fusion energy system, conveniently and safely parked 93 million miles away.

There are some short-term hydro schemes which use off-peak generating capacity to pump water uphill to the reservoir, to be released to generate power during periods of peak demand, but there are losses.

wouldn't everyone have such a setup in their basement and the power companies be out of business?

no because After a while people accept it is impossible and stop trying. we would still think the world is flat if it where not for those who beg to question the knowledge of those even smarter then him who would swear they know the solution.

oh well i would still like to think it is possible some how some day, obviously not by me.

Hydro electric plants are not closed systems, the rely on the energi in a river or waterfall or whatever as an EXTERNAl source of energy.

I you read the wiki article posted above the difference is explained.

http://zimmer.csufresno.edu/~fringwal/stoopid.lis

I like this one :

"Heavier than air flying machines are impossible."
-- Lord Kelvin

"There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will be
obtainable."
-- Albert Einstein, 1932

Hydro electric plants are not closed systems, the rely on the energi in a river or waterfall or whatever as an EXTERNAl source of energy.

I you read the wiki article posted above the difference is explained.

Yes i read the article right after i posted that

"In this house, we obey the Laws of Thermodynamics"
Homer J. Simpson

Did Homer really say that?

Most of our systems get their energy directly or indirectly from the sun. With Hydro it is energy from the sun that powers the weather systems that lift the water into the mountains to fill rivers. Hydro stations and dams extract some of that energy.

If you want a lot of energy what you need is a 2m receiver and about 1km of 1cm wide copper wire. Build a Dyson-Harrop satellite and it will give you 1027Watts of power. Roughly a billion, billion gigawatts.

Most of our systems get their energy directly or indirectly from the sun

Psst, radman, see reply #12

And, yes, Homer did say that.

eddiea6987:

Eddie, the pump is much less than 100% efficient as is the turbine and the generator. Some, less than 50% efficient. At each step you lose energy so where does the extra come from? Wishful thinking?

Ok, but wouldn't the gears make up for the loss of efficiency? I could get gears to turn the generators who knows how many more times then the turbine
AND multiple generators??? all with the same pumps, heck even add another turbine ...

Sorry Eddie but efficient as gears are they still lose some of what is used to turn them to friction.
Every thing you add, every extra generator, pump, every physical device loses you a bit more power.

If you want to generate energy then you need to find an energy source, like wind or water flow, and tap that. The more direct and simple you do that, the more power you should get out.

So for example if you want to lift water using wind power it is better to run a pump or bucket chain directly from your windmill than to generate electricity with the windmill and use that to run an electric motor to drive a pump or bucket chain. The generator alone might lose you 40% of the wind power, the electric motor lose 40% of what's left while gears or pulleys from the windmill directly to the pump might lose 10%, less if well done. Even then, either way, the pump takes more power than it puts out.

The closest thing to magic you can get or do is to make something a bit more efficient but no one in all history has made any machine 100% efficient. There is always loss either from friction, partial energy transfer, or both.

I won't bother quoting laws of thermodynamics to you but the above is just a common sense way to say the same. Now it's up to you to see common sense or find it out yourself.

Interesting GoForSmoke didnt think about friction and all those goodies.

If you want a lot of energy what you need is a 2m receiver and about 1km of 1cm wide copper wire. Build a Dyson-Harrop satellite and it will give you 1027Watts of power. Roughly a billion, billion gigawatts.

Is that even possible? has it been tried? I mean if they can throw money to build a Hadron collider , and bail freddie and fannie then why not throw money on something to help the earth out ..?
I shall seek funding :wink:

eddiea6987:
http://zimmer.csufresno.edu/~fringwal/stoopid.lis

I like this one :

"Heavier than air flying machines are impossible."
-- Lord Kelvin

"There is not the slightest indication that nuclear energy will be
obtainable."
-- Albert Einstein, 1932

Does quoting other people's mistaken views tell you how to make something work? They were wrong about -something, ever- so you must be right?

Another useful search term is 'over unity'

You can't win.
You can't break even.
You can't quit the game.

And the Zeroth law: You must play the game.

They were wrong about -something, ever- so you must be right?

But your doing the same thing..quoting laws , so i must be wrong?

those peoples views where wrong because of "laws" they thought to be true, maybe your in the same boat

the whole idea of quoting them was that because of the knowledge available in their time they made some erroneous statements, times change technology and discoveries advance, could we not agree something YOU see as impossible today me be possible in the future? I cannot blame you for being a man of your time.