Subject: Re: semi-perpetual motion

From: Steve Brown <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 May 1995 15:50:12 GMT

On Thu, 25 May 1995, DaveHatunen wrote:

> In article <[email-masked]>,
> Steve Brown  <[email-masked]> wrote:
>
> >I believe that J Eyer and Tom Gray have overlooked the fact that vehicles
> >are pulled downhill by gravity - a free energy source.
>
> You're joking, right? You really do know that all you're getting is the
> energy it took to get up the hill, right?

So? Are you saying that just because you are not getting a 120% return it
is not worth it? Even if you only get a little energy the point is that
you are charging your batteries and getting some return. I never claimed
anything close to perpetual motion.

> >Take for example the electric bikes with alternators to allow
> >not only the charging of the batteries while the cyclist peddles
> >but also during downhill travel.
>
> Now I know you're joking. You've got to know that the energy to run the
> alternator comes from the energy the bicyclist used to climb the hill.
> Or, on level ground, that the bicyclist is supplying the energy for the
> alternator.
>

Obviously you are missing a point here. You assume the bicyclist is
thinking "Oh joy, I am going to the top of the hill so I can reap a lot
of free energy on the downhill run" in which case your point may be
correct. Now if one realizes that the cyclist is probably thinking more
to the effect of:

  o "I need to get to the store on the other side of the mountain"

  o "I am visting my cousin and her husband"

  o "Time to go to work"

You must realize that you are not going to the top of the hill for the
sole purpose of charging a battery. Yes, that would be mighty dense on
someone's part. The point of using an alternator is that you a GOING
THERE ANYWAY and to utilize the energy of gravity as a FREE BONUS.

Steve

Re: semi-perpetual motion                                                    R

---

From: [email-masked] (DaveHatunen)
Date: Fri, 26 May 1995 19:07:35 GMT

In article <[email-masked]>,
>anything close to perpetual motion.

Hey, You're the one who called it a "free energy source". All I said
was it wasn't free.

>correct. Now if one realizes that the cyclist is probably thinking more

That's not what I said at all: just look up there and see. All I said
is that it ain't "free".

>THERE ANYWAY and to utilize the energy of gravity as a FREE BONUS.

Kind of like when part of your paycheck gets automatically deposited in
Savings Bonds so you don't miss it. Then when you cash them it's free money.

-- 

    ********** DAVE HATUNEN ([email-masked]) **********
    *     Daly City California: almost San Francisco      *
    *   but with parking and lower car insurance rates    *
    *******************************************************