A flying saucer design

General UFO stories

Moderators: ryguy, chrLz, Zep Tepi

A flying saucer design

Postby klaudio » Sun Dec 09, 2007 10:15 pm

Hello, my name is Claudio Bianco, I am an inventor and I have just finished my last work which started as a simple electrical generator and finally turned into a flying saucer. I invite you to see its design in www.cuerdacontinua.com
klaudio
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2007 9:29 pm


Postby ryguy » Sun Dec 09, 2007 10:27 pm

Hi! Welcome to RU!

I find the work you've done interesting, when I have more time I'm going to take closer look at your designs from an EE point of view...just skimming your website (sweet design btw...very nice website), if I had to guess I'd have to say your background may be mechanical engineering or the like? Am I close?

-Ry
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Postby IgnoreTheFacts » Mon Dec 10, 2007 12:07 am

Hi, and welcome. Neat website. While I don't subscribe to anything like a perpetual motion/energy machine is within the grasps of human technology you do have a great website. I plan to go through it even more.
IgnoreTheFacts
On A Quest for Reality
On A Quest for Reality
 
Posts: 106
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 1:37 am

Postby ryguy » Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:38 am

Klaudio - just read through your development write-up. I like your approach and I think your ideas are useful.

The way I see this device - it isn't much different than a windmill harnessing the power of the wind. With your proposed design, you are simply combining natural forces of nature - harnessing the power of gravity and the force of buoyancy - the upward force exerted on an object less dense than itself.

It's a creative use of multiple forces of nature to "do the work" and then your device simply extracts the energy. I like the idea of using the watch-winding approach in your generator...and I noticed that your prototype worked just as a clock/watch winding does (cool video btw) - although I'm very curious about the total work (joules) generated and the realistic amount of energy you could extract relative to the motion of the bell (distance required to sink/float)... Your formulas touch on that I think - but there are sure a lot of other factors that need to be taken into account in your design.

Have you progressed any further with a prototype? Regardless of the flying saucer concept - I think you could have a useful device at least in terms of a self-contained household electricity generating station...again in all depends on how much energy you've been able to extract.

If you want to talk over generator design some time, send me a PM. I have the formulas that might help you calculate actual power output vs. work input... The watch-winding design is creative but I'm not sure it would do the trick on the work side of that equation...

Good work - I'm impressed.

-Ry
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Postby caleban » Mon Dec 10, 2007 7:49 am

I'm very curious about the total work (joules) generated and the realistic
amount of energy you could extract relative to the motion of the bell


(Ok, I'll bite. Excellent fishing expedition, BTW. Had to think a bit about
posting on this since there is a small chance things are as they appear.)

Klaudio, if you really own the ideas there, your basic idea is meritorious.
There are places much more suited for discussions between inventors.
The photos indicate you have a real talent that needs to be encouraged
far beyond what you would get from posting here.

1. The idea to somehow extract energy from the ocean, tides, or even
rivers taps into potential energy from a much larger system so you
bypass the constraint of energy conservation for the small system.
An example would be hydroelectric power.

2. When you isolate your system and constrain it to only the potential
energy contained in your well, you now have to deal with conservation
of energy for this isolated system, as there is no external energy source to tap into.

So, as Ryguy suggested, the total work (joules) available is easier to
characterize. Or compute:

From the work/energy perspective, your concept would
seem to be based upon

PE (gravitational) = weight X height = mgh
or
PE = mass in Kg times 9.8 meter/second (squared) times height in meters = joules

Gravitational Potential Energy
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/gpot.html

Another way to look at it is a linear pendulum.

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

When you isolate your system from external energy sources, like the stream, tides etc,
conservation of energy requires that:
PE down = negative PE up (Energy gained going down must equal the energy needed to get back up.)
In reality, extracting energy involves friction losses. If it moves, there is friction (energy loss).
So PE down - down friction loss = - PE up - up friction loss.
Thus the prediction that the energy (electric air compressor) will consume more work
than the energy the device yields as an isolated system. The difference between the two should be the equivalent total friction losses.

3. Klaudio, I have read enough from the site to think that your instincts are strong in the area
of reducing friction losses. The more efficient you can make it, the better it will compete with
other ideas for extracting energy. Your isolated system should be an ideal way of measuring
and adjusting the friction losses. I wish you the absolute best and hope to be reading about
you becomming famous some day.
User avatar
caleban
In Search of Reality
In Search of Reality
 
Posts: 98
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 4:33 am
Location: NM

Postby ryguy » Mon Dec 10, 2007 2:45 pm

caleban wrote:Klaudio, if you really own the ideas there, your basic idea is meritorious.
There are places much more suited for discussions between inventors.


You've suceeded in proving yourself wrong with your own fantastic feedback which you provided him in your above post.

Or maybe your comment wasn't so much directed toward him? Your writing is very, very, very familiar. I'm reminded of a physicist I've recently exchanged emails with. ;)

-Ry
---
"Only a fool of a scientist would dismiss the evidence and reports in front of him and substitute his own beliefs in their place." - Paul Kurtz

The RU Blog
Top Secret Writers
User avatar
ryguy
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 4920
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 3:49 am
Location: Another Dimension

Postby Access Denied » Tue Dec 11, 2007 3:45 am

I think that pretty much covers it guys... time will tell if the OP responds to your thoughtful posts or turns out to be a drive-by spammer.
Men go and come but Earth abides.
User avatar
Access Denied
1 of the RU3
 
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 7:32 am
Location: [redacted]


Google

Return to UFOs

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests

cron